|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes.
Ummmm, no.
There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K.
This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. It was also Republican obstructionism that created the fiscal cliff, and that's also preventing a deal from happening. They want spending cuts that would fall on the most vulnerable people, while trying to prevent taxes from rising on those who need it least. If they got what they wanted, the result would be a massive drop in aggregate demand, because poor people spend a greater proportion of their money than rich people.
|
On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters.
If Democrats were able to push that thru then Im pretty they would have already since they basically have been trying to push it thru house for about a month now to no avail.
|
On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters.
I dunno, sc2superfan seems to be praying really hard that the middle class suffers 
Adreme, take a look at the article I linked on the last page. The bills passage isn't a simple case of having the votes.
|
On December 28 2012 10:44 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. If Democrats were able to push that thru then Im pretty they would have already since they basically have been trying to push it thru house for about a month now to no avail.
Good luck to them campaigning on blocking tax cuts for 98% of the people, by holding it hostage to the 2%.
The political analysis is that Republicans would be more open to a deal after falling over the fiscal cliff because they would then be voting for tax cuts, whereas now they're voting for tax increases. Yes, this is twisted logic, but that's life when you've sold your soul to Grover Norquist.
|
On December 28 2012 10:48 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:44 Adreme wrote:On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. If Democrats were able to push that thru then Im pretty they would have already since they basically have been trying to push it thru house for about a month now to no avail. Good luck to them campaigning on blocking tax cuts for 98% of the people, by holding it hostage to the 2%.
John Boehner can just not let that come up for a vote and force a vote on say extending tax cuts for everyone so that they have cover after they go up.
|
On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. It was also Republican obstructionism that created the fiscal cliff, and that's also preventing a deal from happening. They want spending cuts that would fall on the most vulnerable people, while trying to prevent taxes from rising on those who need it least. If they got what they wanted, the result would be a massive drop in aggregate demand, because poor people spend a greater proportion of their money than rich people.
Actually, if the United States is to remain fiscally solvent - raising taxes on the top 2% will not suffice. The proposed increase in rates by Obama will be fruitless, there will still be a huge hole in the budget, eventually a huge increase in taxation on everyone will be needed (which will slow growth, and put us back in recession) if we undergo that path. The only possible alternative is to undergo a comprehensive structural reform of the American entitlement system. The fundamental truth is, we can no longer kick the can down the road - that 1 trillion deficit we hear about..that doesn't actually cover everything, the real debt level is much higher.
You argue that Republicans are causing all the problems...that makes no sense, neither side is willing to come to a compromise, democrats are equally responsible. The last sentence you wrote made me laugh so loud I almost had a heart attack, clearly you are making up your figures. Are you really implying that the majority of middle class wealth comes from government welfare? Of course sharp cuts in government spending is negative to growth, as is large scale increases in taxation, a grand bargain is needed. We should pass the Simpson-Bowles plan, and use Ryan-Riviln approach to fix our welfare apparatus.
|
On December 28 2012 11:35 th3j35t3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. It was also Republican obstructionism that created the fiscal cliff, and that's also preventing a deal from happening. They want spending cuts that would fall on the most vulnerable people, while trying to prevent taxes from rising on those who need it least. If they got what they wanted, the result would be a massive drop in aggregate demand, because poor people spend a greater proportion of their money than rich people. Actually, if the United States is to remain fiscally solvent - raising taxes on the top 2% will not suffice. The proposed increase in rates by Obama will be fruitless, there will still be a huge hole in the budget, eventually a huge increase in taxation on everyone will be needed (which will slow growth, and put us back in recession) if we undergo that path. The only possible alternative is to undergo a comprehensive structural reform of the American entitlement system. The fundamental truth is, we can no longer kick the can down the road - that 1 trillion deficit we hear about..that doesn't actually cover everything, the real debt level is much higher. You argue that Republicans are causing all the problems...that makes no sense, neither side is willing to come to a compromise, democrats are equally responsible. The last sentence you wrote made me laugh so loud I almost had a heart attack, clearly you are making up your figures. Are you really implying that the majority of middle class wealth comes from government welfare? Of course sharp cuts in government spending is negative to growth, as is large scale increases in taxation, a grand bargain is needed. We should pass the Simpson-Bowles plan, and use Ryan-Riviln approach to fix our welfare apparatus.
That isn't the only possible alternative. The realistic and most effective one would be both a tax raise and entitlement reform at the same time.
I think reasonable senators like Graham and Chambliss understand this and hence the reason they ditched Norquist's embarrassing hostage demands. Norquist is a dying idealistic relic of the past and should quietly move on to inevitable extinction along with OWS and the tea baggers.
|
On December 28 2012 11:51 forgottendreams wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 11:35 th3j35t3r wrote:On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. It was also Republican obstructionism that created the fiscal cliff, and that's also preventing a deal from happening. They want spending cuts that would fall on the most vulnerable people, while trying to prevent taxes from rising on those who need it least. If they got what they wanted, the result would be a massive drop in aggregate demand, because poor people spend a greater proportion of their money than rich people. Actually, if the United States is to remain fiscally solvent - raising taxes on the top 2% will not suffice. The proposed increase in rates by Obama will be fruitless, there will still be a huge hole in the budget, eventually a huge increase in taxation on everyone will be needed (which will slow growth, and put us back in recession) if we undergo that path. The only possible alternative is to undergo a comprehensive structural reform of the American entitlement system. The fundamental truth is, we can no longer kick the can down the road - that 1 trillion deficit we hear about..that doesn't actually cover everything, the real debt level is much higher. You argue that Republicans are causing all the problems...that makes no sense, neither side is willing to come to a compromise, democrats are equally responsible. The last sentence you wrote made me laugh so loud I almost had a heart attack, clearly you are making up your figures. Are you really implying that the majority of middle class wealth comes from government welfare? Of course sharp cuts in government spending is negative to growth, as is large scale increases in taxation, a grand bargain is needed. We should pass the Simpson-Bowles plan, and use Ryan-Riviln approach to fix our welfare apparatus. That isn't the only possible alternative. The realistic and most effective one would be both a tax raise and entitlement reform at the same time. I think reasonable senators like Graham and Chambliss understand this and hence the reason they ditched Norquist's embarrassing hostage demands. Norquist is a dying idealistic relic of the past and should quietly move on to inevitable extinction along with OWS and the tea baggers.
Hallelujah!!!! Another person who understands the gravity of the situation we are in. I hope you are right about the extinction of the ideologues, but they still wield immense power, hopefully they will go back to the dustbin of quackery - the tea party and OWS ( and its ilk) are both the antithesis of progress. Pragmatic moderates unite!
Sadly, however I don't believe the Democrats will ever touch entitlement reform - too many special interest groups and labor unions that oppose meaningful progress.
|
On December 28 2012 11:51 forgottendreams wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 11:35 th3j35t3r wrote:On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. It was also Republican obstructionism that created the fiscal cliff, and that's also preventing a deal from happening. They want spending cuts that would fall on the most vulnerable people, while trying to prevent taxes from rising on those who need it least. If they got what they wanted, the result would be a massive drop in aggregate demand, because poor people spend a greater proportion of their money than rich people. Actually, if the United States is to remain fiscally solvent - raising taxes on the top 2% will not suffice. The proposed increase in rates by Obama will be fruitless, there will still be a huge hole in the budget, eventually a huge increase in taxation on everyone will be needed (which will slow growth, and put us back in recession) if we undergo that path. The only possible alternative is to undergo a comprehensive structural reform of the American entitlement system. The fundamental truth is, we can no longer kick the can down the road - that 1 trillion deficit we hear about..that doesn't actually cover everything, the real debt level is much higher. You argue that Republicans are causing all the problems...that makes no sense, neither side is willing to come to a compromise, democrats are equally responsible. The last sentence you wrote made me laugh so loud I almost had a heart attack, clearly you are making up your figures. Are you really implying that the majority of middle class wealth comes from government welfare? Of course sharp cuts in government spending is negative to growth, as is large scale increases in taxation, a grand bargain is needed. We should pass the Simpson-Bowles plan, and use Ryan-Riviln approach to fix our welfare apparatus. That isn't the only possible alternative. The realistic and most effective one would be both a tax raise and entitlement reform at the same time. I think reasonable senators like Graham and Chambliss understand this and hence the reason they ditched Norquist's embarrassing hostage demands. Norquist is a dying idealistic relic of the past and should quietly move on to inevitable extinction along with OWS and the tea baggers.
I'm honestly very optimistic about the coming year, and part of the reason is that I would have once laughed in the face of anyone who suggested that either Saxby Chambliss or Lyndsey Graham were reasonable senators. On this day, however, I totally agree with you, and I hope their sort is on its way up further along the Republican leadership food chain. The GOP needs folks willing to negotiate in good faith while recognizing the possibility that their opposition's viewpoint contains at least a kernal of truth (the same holds true for Democrats mind you), rather than those who pray for the downfall of the middle class and can see nothing but the imaginary line Grover Norquist drew in the sand of the malleable Republican Party platform.
|
On December 28 2012 12:08 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 11:51 forgottendreams wrote:On December 28 2012 11:35 th3j35t3r wrote:On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. It was also Republican obstructionism that created the fiscal cliff, and that's also preventing a deal from happening. They want spending cuts that would fall on the most vulnerable people, while trying to prevent taxes from rising on those who need it least. If they got what they wanted, the result would be a massive drop in aggregate demand, because poor people spend a greater proportion of their money than rich people. Actually, if the United States is to remain fiscally solvent - raising taxes on the top 2% will not suffice. The proposed increase in rates by Obama will be fruitless, there will still be a huge hole in the budget, eventually a huge increase in taxation on everyone will be needed (which will slow growth, and put us back in recession) if we undergo that path. The only possible alternative is to undergo a comprehensive structural reform of the American entitlement system. The fundamental truth is, we can no longer kick the can down the road - that 1 trillion deficit we hear about..that doesn't actually cover everything, the real debt level is much higher. You argue that Republicans are causing all the problems...that makes no sense, neither side is willing to come to a compromise, democrats are equally responsible. The last sentence you wrote made me laugh so loud I almost had a heart attack, clearly you are making up your figures. Are you really implying that the majority of middle class wealth comes from government welfare? Of course sharp cuts in government spending is negative to growth, as is large scale increases in taxation, a grand bargain is needed. We should pass the Simpson-Bowles plan, and use Ryan-Riviln approach to fix our welfare apparatus. That isn't the only possible alternative. The realistic and most effective one would be both a tax raise and entitlement reform at the same time. I think reasonable senators like Graham and Chambliss understand this and hence the reason they ditched Norquist's embarrassing hostage demands. Norquist is a dying idealistic relic of the past and should quietly move on to inevitable extinction along with OWS and the tea baggers. I'm honestly very optimistic about the coming year, and part of the reason is that I would have once laughed in the face of anyone who suggested that either Saxby Chambliss or Lyndsey Graham were reasonable senators. On this day, however, I totally agree with you, and I hope their sort is on its way up further along the Republican leadership food chain. The GOP needs folks willing to negotiate in good faith while recognizing the possibility that their opposition's viewpoint contains at least a kernal of truth (the same holds true for Democrats mind you), rather than those who pray for the downfall of the middle class and can see nothing but the imaginary line Grover Norquist drew in the sand of the malleable Republican Party platform.
Absolutely, I hope that's the direction both parties undergo, I am very optimistic about the future of the Republican party, the tea party has almost completely fallen out of favor with the electorate and the next generation of Republicans will finally see the fall of far-right social conservatives and the Neocon branches that exist today. Because of the changing social dynamic of the demographics of this nation, Republicans will revert to their traditional role - the optimistic pragmatists like George H.W Bush (no 41).
Hopefully Obama will fufill his 2008 campaign promise to move away from partisanship as well.
|
On December 28 2012 12:20 th3j35t3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 12:08 farvacola wrote:On December 28 2012 11:51 forgottendreams wrote:On December 28 2012 11:35 th3j35t3r wrote:On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K. This is recession by massive deficit reduction. Somehow, I think the irony will be loss on the masses of unthinking Republican voters. It was also Republican obstructionism that created the fiscal cliff, and that's also preventing a deal from happening. They want spending cuts that would fall on the most vulnerable people, while trying to prevent taxes from rising on those who need it least. If they got what they wanted, the result would be a massive drop in aggregate demand, because poor people spend a greater proportion of their money than rich people. Actually, if the United States is to remain fiscally solvent - raising taxes on the top 2% will not suffice. The proposed increase in rates by Obama will be fruitless, there will still be a huge hole in the budget, eventually a huge increase in taxation on everyone will be needed (which will slow growth, and put us back in recession) if we undergo that path. The only possible alternative is to undergo a comprehensive structural reform of the American entitlement system. The fundamental truth is, we can no longer kick the can down the road - that 1 trillion deficit we hear about..that doesn't actually cover everything, the real debt level is much higher. You argue that Republicans are causing all the problems...that makes no sense, neither side is willing to come to a compromise, democrats are equally responsible. The last sentence you wrote made me laugh so loud I almost had a heart attack, clearly you are making up your figures. Are you really implying that the majority of middle class wealth comes from government welfare? Of course sharp cuts in government spending is negative to growth, as is large scale increases in taxation, a grand bargain is needed. We should pass the Simpson-Bowles plan, and use Ryan-Riviln approach to fix our welfare apparatus. That isn't the only possible alternative. The realistic and most effective one would be both a tax raise and entitlement reform at the same time. I think reasonable senators like Graham and Chambliss understand this and hence the reason they ditched Norquist's embarrassing hostage demands. Norquist is a dying idealistic relic of the past and should quietly move on to inevitable extinction along with OWS and the tea baggers. I'm honestly very optimistic about the coming year, and part of the reason is that I would have once laughed in the face of anyone who suggested that either Saxby Chambliss or Lyndsey Graham were reasonable senators. On this day, however, I totally agree with you, and I hope their sort is on its way up further along the Republican leadership food chain. The GOP needs folks willing to negotiate in good faith while recognizing the possibility that their opposition's viewpoint contains at least a kernal of truth (the same holds true for Democrats mind you), rather than those who pray for the downfall of the middle class and can see nothing but the imaginary line Grover Norquist drew in the sand of the malleable Republican Party platform. Absolutely, I hope that's the direction both parties undergo, I am very optimistic about the future of the Republican party, the tea party has almost completely fallen out of favor with the electorate and the next generation of Republicans will finally see the fall of far-right social conservatives and the Neocon branches that exist today. Because of the changing social dynamic of the demographics of this nation, Republicans will revert to their traditional role - the optimistic pragmatists like George H.W Bush (no 41). Hopefully Obama will fufill his 2008 campaign promise to move away from partisanship as well.
But I find that kind of silly;since, all parties should be pragmatic and seek a balanced budget, it's the way they approch it that should be different. When I heard people state thtat the So-and-so party is against a balance budget I laguh because that's a stupid statement, the way they reach it is different, but both are pragatic about it; however, their approch is different. And the way they choose to reach the balance is the difference between parties in a sense, sure there is a moral difference, but that's an opinion, no party can be against a balanced budget and be taken seriously.
|
On December 28 2012 10:29 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. What exactly does 'feels the consequences of their votes" entail?
when they vote to raise taxes on other people (by voting for Obama) their taxes get raised. that is the only way they will learn.
and tbh, I'm tired of Obama getting his way. it'll be worth taking the hit just to see him burned for once.
|
On December 28 2012 10:36 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. Ummmm, no. There is no chance that middle class taxes will rise. Zero. Democrats will just push through a bill extending the tax cuts for families making less than 250K.
wanna bet?
|
On December 28 2012 17:33 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:29 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. What exactly does 'feels the consequences of their votes" entail? when they vote to raise taxes on other people (by voting for Obama) their taxes get raised. that is the only way they will learn. and tbh, I'm tired of Obama getting his way. it'll be worth taking the hit just to see him burned for once.
Do you even watch what has happened the last 2 years because he hasnt gotten his way for the past 2 years? Also people voted and support higher taxes on the rich for two major reasons. One, they are only group doing very well right now making record profits once again.
Secondly if you are going to balance a budget by only doing cuts (which is virtually impossible but lets pretend for a moment) then you are going to wind up doing it on the backs of the middle class and not the rich. How would it be fair to ask middle class and poor who are suffering right now to help pay down debt while rich are in general doing as good if not better than they were before the recession hit?
|
On December 28 2012 17:33 sc2superfan101 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2012 10:29 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote:On December 28 2012 10:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:On December 28 2012 09:51 BarackHusseinObama wrote:
Am i the only one reluctantly hoping we go over the cliff? I'm praying for it every day. it's far past time the middle-class actually feels the consequences of their votes. What exactly does 'feels the consequences of their votes" entail? when they vote to raise taxes on other people (by voting for Obama) their taxes get raised. that is the only way they will learn. and tbh, I'm tired of Obama getting his way. it'll be worth taking the hit just to see him burned for once.
Hopefully the GOP will start shunning people like you who think politics is some game where when you don't get your way the goal then becomes to stick it to "them". I thought you had turned a new leaf after the election but you're more childish and ignorant than ever. One day when you become a taxpayer you might change your tune.
|
Roffle superfan. You really think that Obama is going to get anything but a bump in his approval numbers if we "go off the cliff"? If anything they're just going to wait after the first of the year let everyone get in a hubbub as nothing changes and then let everyone look good as they get back to work in the new congress and reverse the damage and say "we need to work harder togeather in the future to make sure this never happens again".
GOP's been going downhill every sense the party lost its head after Bush left office. This fiscal cliff nonsense will be its bottoming out point for sure I think (or unreasonably hope).
|
I wouldn't put much weight into what superfan says. He's the one that said Nate Silver allowed his bias to interfere with his models.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it is pretty obvious that raising taxes on the 2% isn't going to solve the larger budget problem, but the conclusion from that fact is not to cut entitlements per se.
the future budget shortfall is partially a demographics shift (more older people), but it is also caused by highly inflated medical cost, as well as a large portion of the economy flowing out of the tax system altogether.
cutting social services without improving efficiency is just going to make people worse off, because necessities have to be paid for whether privately or collectively.
as stated before, republicans' aim is not to find a workable solution. it is a lot of ideological crusading against the very existence of benefits. they have this ROME WILL FALL IF BREAD AND CIRCUSES!! mentality about any kind of government spending, which translates into welfare and lack of vitality. it's a very visceral sentiment without much attachment to reality.
|
On December 29 2012 06:17 oneofthem wrote:
it is pretty obvious that raising taxes on the 2% isn't going to solve the larger budget problem, but the conclusion from that fact is not to cut entitlements per se.
the future budget shortfall is partially a demographics shift (more older people), but it is also caused by highly inflated medical cost, as well as a large portion of the economy flowing out of the tax system altogether.
cutting social services without improving efficiency is just going to make people worse off, because necessities have to be paid for whether privately or collectively.
as stated before, republicans' aim is not to find a workable solution. it is a lot of ideological crusading against the very existence of benefits. they have this ROME WILL FALL IF BREAD AND CIRCUSES!! mentality about any kind of government spending, which translates into welfare and lack of vitality. it's a very visceral sentiment without much attachment to reality.
Not all government spending. They have no problem with a bloated DoD budget because 'Muuuuuuuuurica.
|
On December 29 2012 06:17 oneofthem wrote:
it is pretty obvious that raising taxes on the 2% isn't going to solve the larger budget problem, but the conclusion from that fact is not to cut entitlements per se.
the future budget shortfall is partially a demographics shift (more older people), but it is also caused by highly inflated medical cost, as well as a large portion of the economy flowing out of the tax system altogether.
cutting social services without improving efficiency is just going to make people worse off, because necessities have to be paid for whether privately or collectively.
as stated before, republicans' aim is not to find a workable solution. it is a lot of ideological crusading against the very existence of benefits. they have this ROME WILL FALL IF BREAD AND CIRCUSES!! mentality about any kind of government spending, which translates into welfare and lack of vitality. it's a very visceral sentiment without much attachment to reality.
What has happened in a lot of european countries is raising the age of retirement. That would seem like one of the most effective and pretty gentle ways of doing it as opposed to lowering rates. Doing it in a time of high unemployment though seems like bad timing.
When that is said, the real way to increase income is in closing some of the holes Romney and other republicans wanted to close and the signal to higher wage americans that they are not forever safe from laws and in this case taxes is needed to make them less wage-heavy (probably they will move more of their income to financial incentive wage, but then we are most likely talking a tax hole in the first place...).
The rest is a question of reducing budgets. I see absolutely no reason why the parties are so far from eachother in their media clowning. Eventually they will need either a compromise or a change of political leadership in the house and/or senate (that is both parties from the looks of it!). Going over the cliff is symbolic at best, while not reaching a deal with ex post facto effect before january is over would be a big problem. If I am reading what is happening correctly, at least the moderate republicans will be willing to compromise in january. At that point it will be a question of how many democrats are unwilling to make the ends reach and so far it seems completely unreasonable to expect major resistance there.
The only real problem I see is the medical cost increases. Some of the newer treatments are excessively expensive and that has to be tackled in some way internationally or the medical industry will suffer (even rich northern european countries are choosing not to use some of them because of their 150.000 per year bare cost (in US that is significantly more. My very unscientific research in the subject of medicine prices suggests 5-7 times for some of the cheap existing products!).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
