Associated Press
The plan, by the most optimistic of scenarios, was for the Senate leaders to reach some kind of fiscal agreement this afternoon, vote on it tonight, and send it to the House for a vote tomorrow. How's that plan shaping up? Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) spoke a few minutes ago on the floor and said the following:
"We have been negotiating now for 36 hours or thereabouts. We did have conversations last night that ended late in the evening between staffs. This morning, we have been trying to come up with some counteroffer to my friend's proposal. We have been unable to do that. I have had a number of conversations with the President, and at this stage we're unable to make a counteroffer.
"The Republican leader has told me that -- and he's just said here -- that he's working with the Vice President, and he and the Vice President, I wish them well. In the meantime, I will continue to try to come up with something but at this stage, I don't have a counteroffer to make. Perhaps as the day wears on, I will be able to. I will say this: I think that the Republican leader has shown absolutely good faith. It's just that we are apart on some pretty big issues."
"We are apart" is an excellent three-word summary. By any fair estimate, Reid, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and their aides have worked aggressively since Friday night, but the predictable obstacles are proving to be intractable. Republicans, at least for now, are simply demanding too much of the Senate majority.
Reid has gone as far as he can, and McConnell either can't accept Democrats' offer or can't muster the votes on the GOP's side of the aisle (or perhaps both). The two leaders have gone back and forth, but Reid simply has no more counteroffers to present.
What seems to be the trouble? As of this afternoon, McConnell is demanding chained CPI, and wants more tax breaks for the wealthiest of the wealthy through higher estate-tax thresholds. He's also refusing to include a debt-ceiling increase in the agreement.
Or put another way, in a literal sense, Republicans are holding up middle class tax breaks by demanding cuts to Social Security benefits and a tax break for the top 0.01% of the country -- all while laying the groundwork for another hostage crisis in two months.
Reid just can't go along with this, so the two sides are at an impasse. McConnell has turned to Vice President Biden to see what more can be done, but at this hour, it does not appear a deal is going to come together. Reid may bring a sensible compromise to the floor later, based solely on what Dems find fair, but by all indications, it would be killed by a Republican filibuster.
McConnell may be playing for time -- he may find some new flexibility tonight, if Dems refuse to make additional concessions -- but for now, the talks are breaking down. What happens if there's no additional progress? Then Reid and Senate Democrats will move on to the final contingency plan.
As we discussed yesterday, if all else fails, Reid will bring a simple package to the floor tomorrow: lower rates on income up to $250,000 and extended jobless aid. That's it. If Senate Republicans kill it, the deadlines will pass and Democrats will try again in 2013. If the Senate passes it and the House balks, we'll see the same outcome.
I'll have another post this evening, updating readers on where things stand.
Leave a Comment:
They can do this on Jan 4, after West and a few other rabid Tea-Partiers have been replaced with more reasonable people. I know we still won't have a majority in the House, but the numbers will be better ...
Do NOT Cave in , just pander along with these Idiots and let it fall !
I don't understand Reid's language. Saying the other side has "made a good faith offer" and that "I don't have a counteroffer" clearly accepts the onus as being on the Democratic side.
Reid is quite willing to accept the idea that Social Security is part of the problem, and to do the work of republicans and put pressure on the White House.
Given this past decisions trusting the republicans not to abuse filibusters, the Senate's failure to pass cap and trade... its time for a change. We need a new Senate majority leader.
Democrats just can't seem to master this thing called politics or messaging.
What even offends me more is that McConnell is publicly "dissing" Obama by saying that he is "turning to Biden". As much as I like Joe Biden, he is not the President!
WHY has nobody come out and put a stop to the belief that it is OBAMA that is at fault here? WHY hasn't Biden come out and said the Republicans CANNOT run to him for "protection" from mean old Obama?
WHY aren't the Democrats ALL OVER all of the TV stations today? The Republicans sure are! WHY aren't they explaining that all McConnell's offer is is the same old crap he's been asking for before with an added opportunity to "punish" the elderly? "Good faith offer", my arse!!
Once,
I have that answer for you: Because he is BLACK.
It is that simple.
And it is that horrible.
And that, my friend, is the absolute truth of what is happening and why it is happening.
Is there any question about who controls the conversation in this country. Democrats don't get invited to the Sunday shows. Republicans do.
Washington is nothing more than a cesspool of PetePetersenThink.
The country is simply going to have to have this political war. Wingnut World will die if Democrats have the spine. No more half-ass compromising with the Confederates anxious to take us all back to 1850.
@Donna: I don't know that it's only that he is black. It's probably more than Obama wasn't really the sort of genteel back-slapping buddy-buddy Senator that played like he entertained every frickin' hair-brained idiocy that came out of any Republican's mouth. Biden can play that game. Other people, like Obama, either refuse or can't because it makes them nauseous. (I'm like that; it makes me nauseous so I have empathy for Obama on that.)
"Democrats don't get invited to the Sunday shows. Republicans do."
Okay, I know this is generally true, but: wasn't Obama on "Meet the Press" this morning?
Go back and check the guest lists over the last couple of years. You'll have your answer.
He was the only one - except for Reid's idiotic ravings - and it was filmed yesterday.
Sorry, but the Republicans have no intention of budging on any of their demands. For one thing, they haven't yet figured out they lost the election, but the bigger part of it is that they've always before been able to wait till the last instant and Obama caved. Remember Boehner's "I got 98% of what I wanted" remark?
The only way it will finally dawn on them is for us to go over the cliff, and even then it's likely to take awhile to sink in. The sad part of that is the unemployment will stop for many people who depend upon that for rent and food.
So, it's still about the rich. What a shocking surprise! I hope every single one of these "Americans" lose their positions in upcoming elections.
The 98% need to stick together with Democrats and the President and make sure things work out.
This is terrorism! Being held hostage is disgusting. These "lawmakers" need to do their damned job and get it worked out! Said it before... if it were us pulling this idiocy, we would have been fired long ago. The rich need to join the rest of us and pay their part!
Would someone ask Gregory why Obama should "talk tough" to seniors about SS and Medicare? Better yet, inform him that SS has nothing to do with the budget. Have Gregory ask Bonehead why he doesn't "talk tough" to the teapubs about taxing the rich.
NVM. I forgot. Gregory is one of the rich teapubs. I've got to remember why I never watch the Sunday talking heads. I can't stand the all the teapubs sitting at their luau spewing garbage.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/us/politics/obama-accuses-republicans-of-blocking-tax-deal.html?_r=1&
Senate Republicans emerged from a closed-door meeting to say they agreed with Democrats that the request — (((( for lower payments to beneficiary programs like Social Security and slow their growth.))) which had temporarily brought talks to a standstill — was not appropriate for a quick deal to avert the tax increases and spending cuts starting Jan. 1.
Mr. Reid made clear that Democrats did not intend to include Social Security in any stopgap package. Doing so would make it hard for him to round up votes from his own party, and he has resisted touching Social Security.
“We’re not going to have any Social Security cuts,” Mr. Reid said on the floor.
I am confused on the reporting here , I am certain it is because of confusion , and of the timing of press releases coming out of congress chaotically
Once, Just picture Mitch McConnell and a few others with a white flour sack with eye holes burned with a cigar, holding torches riding up to the WH.
I keep hearing the President is to blame for not coming to the table, when he has been cooperative and here's a news flash:
Congress works on budgets, the President has not been presented with anything to sign, so…. I just have trouble with this "logic" of the President is at fault here.
The press needs to quit saying the President isn't working toward getting this matter resolved. He even went on MTP… Geez.
big business does not want to pay matching contributions
If Mitch McConnell and his Republican brand truly love America, they'd learn to let go!
Ah, but alas, they love their own a$$es more! -Kevo
They do love their America, unfortunately it's a gated community in their heads.
Thanks for the update, Steve! Would that the Senate minority could be so helpful!
Why am I not surprised?! Can the GOP ever turn down a chance to hurt the poor or the elderly? Can they ever do anything to help anyone but the rich?
Of course not. Go over the cliff, President Obama. It's the only way to win with these ruthless, greedy cutthroats.
"We are apart." Yep, that pretty much sums it up. How about, "And never the twain shall meet?"
PS, Yes, thanks MSNBC for the update. Some of us have only one TV and the taller person in the house is watching a football game......yawn..
Rachel, I wish I were tall like you! I'd yank that remote....
What "Filibuster Along With Mitch" needs is a vist to the principals office and a meeting with the hickory switch. Oh, and send along with him all the repubs from the Senate and the House.
Can't compromise with unreasonable and unfair policies...the American electorate has spoken...standing in line for hours to demand support for a reasonable legislature which is being ignored by republicans...so let them crash and burn but the minority should not be allowed to blackmail the majority any longer. The debt ceiling should not be up for debate...ever...and tax breaks should only be for those who really need them...fair and reasonable and the public knows this.
bjobtts, #5 Unfortunately, fair and reasonable are unfamiliar terms to the Republicans.
Over the cliff we go. I'm for it and I've got the cat strapped on to my parachute.
On Three: Jump!
Or put another way, the Republicans were proposing the same thing Obama had offered earlier and that was what is holding up the deal (see source below).
Obama offered the chained CPI for a big deal, which included the debt ceiling to be raised. The GOP want to have it almost their own way...get the big concessions from the Dems while they give minimally. they do appear to think they won the election. they also appear to think once again that the polls are all wrong which show that the majority of americans, including the majority of Repubs support POTUS's position. There is no reason at all for the Dems to make major concessions. The GOP will be forced to concede far more in just 2 days.
RobDon,
Are you paying attention at all? The Republicans ARE NOT proposing the same thing Obama offered earlier. All Obama's offerings have been tied to taxing the top 1%. There is absolutely NOTHING in McConnell's proposal that would do that. All that other nonsense the Republicans are batting about right now are just "obsfucations".
Both sides have to give and Obama has done that (including bringing CPI to the table which will really HURT people on Social Security). Exactly WHAT have the Republicans given???
CPI does not belong on the damn table. Obama had better not sell people out to pacify a bunch of cutthroat ideologues in the T-Party!.
We need a new Senate Majority leader, one who won't sell us out to the Republicans! Reid, it is time for you to go.
Yeah, we just gotta make sure those people living so high on the hog on Social Security stop ripping off the rest of us with their unreasonable demands not to eat cat food and dog food when our failure to pass the Farm Bill doubles food prices in a month.
futhermucking southern traitor scumsucking inbred fookwits - too bad my ancestors didn't ethnically cleanse the South of traitors when we had the chance.
"the only 'good Republicans' are pushing up daisies."
You go, TC Don't be shy!! Don't hold back!
Don't fret, TC --
Sherman burned my ancestors out of SC and sent them scurrying to AK absent their money and slaves. Good for him!
Most of the other side ended up as Western Kaintuck farmer types who had middled along since the 1630s with (apparently) indifferent politics. Oh, and no slaves, just a little land now poisoned by strip-mined coal.
So it stands to reason that my squeaky blue politics would drive me back to live in MD. That's as far south as I care to go.
Senate Dems need to bring their plan to the floor and let the Republicans filibuster. Show the American people who is standing in the way.
Extremists beware! Your numbers are few,your power is limited and your rich backers are going to be exposed.
What we have here is a handful of mega-rich folk who seek to destroy America so that they can take control. In order to have more political sway these greedy pigs dupe dummies into forming groups that do their bidding. I figured that once those dummies awakened and saw how they were begging to be knocked down and placed into the have not category they would rebel. Silly me, I swear I am not really an optimist but I just thought even an idiot has a limit to his stupidity.
See you guys come mid-term election.
#10, There are only limits to genius; stupidity, as we have seen, has no limits.
Perhaps Republicans would be more reasonable if there were no cameras and microphones to play to. They need to be sent someplace where there are no distractions. Guantanamo, for example.
They belong in Bedlam. I despise Asylums under most circumstances but these nuts are asking to be put away.
Guantanamo would still be the Carribbean in January. I'd propose the former Amchitka AFB until they see the light of day.
Does Russia still have the gulag that Solzhenitzan was kept in? Maybe the dining hall is free on Monday?
In case folks are not aware, the lower end of incomes saw a 50% income tax increase just a year ago. Nobody else had an increase. So now, do we get another increase in taxes this year? My income is around $20,000 per year. Dang!
You didn't actually see an increase, more like less of a cut than what you were getting before.
Republican NewSpeak: We don't increase the taxes on the poor, we simply decrease the decrease they had before ! Since a double negative really is a positive a decreased decrease is an increase.
#12, c wotton,
American exceptionalism.
I keep a couple of things in mind:
There is a group who feel their job is to “drown government in the bathtub.” These anarchist see it is their duty to prevent big government, small government or any government from functioning...and there is a constituency that do not recognize anything resembling “good or legitimate governance,” especially when the opposition is in power.
Secondly, I have learned from years of negotiating large contracts, small contracts and all types of agreements. (I even spent two years as the lead union negotiator.) The side who cares the most is most likely to lose. In other words, if you can’t walk away from the table (normally while laughing) and come back tomorrow...you will lose.
I hope the President and Mr. Reed can put specifics on the table one at a time and force the Republicans to take a public stand on those specifics.
It's time to be winning to lose in the short term. Let the country really *feel* what it is like to live under what Republicans say is best for the country. And I mean REALLY feel it. Balanced budget for two years. Social Security and Medicare cuts. RIGHT NOW. Get it over with. Let those seniors who voted for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan see what they voted for future generations. RIGHT NOW.
DWIA,
I know how you feel, but unfortunately, it wouldn't hurt them, just the people who need the safety nets.
As for the people who voted for Romney: You can't fix stupid.
If you could, there would be no T-party left.
I understand that. That idea would be the most sure way to feel the disaster that is conservative ideas and policy. The best way to do it is for Democrats to simply stand up and say NO MORE compromising toward a right-wing world. NONE. Will they do it, or will they just muddle along pissing away any electoral victories they get and gradually leading the country ever more rightward.
The country simply must have this fight. Without a fight, we're on a slow train to the banana republic that Republicans want. The country MUST learn that the 30+ years of conservative ideas and policies are failed ones and will continue to fail in such disastrous fashion that we don't want to go there.
Oops, edit on 13.1: It's time to be WILLING to lose in...
DWIA, I have a bad feeling when I hear people like Engle say things like, "minimalist bill" to keep us from going over the cliff", that we have already lost.
I sure hope the Democrats hold firm. I wish I had a say in the matter. But we're all just little peons in this sad, sad game the rich are playing.
for those of you liberals that think the fiscal cliff is all about tax cuts you should know there is more much more to it. after reading this link I wonder how many will be saying stand firm do not cave on tax issues.
http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top_stories/story/Fiscal-Cliff-to-affect-federal-funding-for-schools/ulRdpRVtPkW5ZywxkIC1WQ.cspx
Really tc thats the best you can come up with. Here is a clue, those cuts can be fixed with an emergency spending bill and you know it. What has you righties concerned is the military cuts. We already know you could care less about education.
Unbelievable. An uneducated conservative bonehead thinks he's going to educate about what the stupidly-named "fiscal cliff" is. Back to your cave, caveman.
disgusted
what a mind you must have to read mine. Just keep on touting the coming of the cliff now about 45 minutes away. If you are all for dropping education benefits by 9% it is OK by me by the way the military budget has already passed the senate committee and all funds have been restored and them some. the House has already passed the bill.
http://www.appropriations.senate.gov/news.cfm?method=news.view&id=c55975b6-9807-49bf-aef6-58afbbc95677
You know Disgusted,
It is amazing that repub conservatard trolls-from blanks, to kkkliff to thoughtless conservative-even come on this site to post their bull@!$%#.
donna
please show how I have posted misleading information. the troll is you as you have no honest criticism just personal attacks. I will gladly put my academic credentials up against yours any day of the week.By the way the house just passed a TAX bill with a small increase above the $400,000 income level not the $250, asked for. The cliff regarding sequestration has not been dealt with and the cuts to education etc still stand while the defense cuts have been restored. Prove me wrong
End the Bush era tax cuts and his Patriot act and let us try to return to the real America. We killed off enterprise by putting a seven year limit on patent protection thus allowing big business to wait and see if a new idea takes off before they simply steal it. We destroyed banking by deregulating it thus causing interest on savings and CDs to plummet while banks made shaky loans they bundled up and sold. We destroyed freedom in a phony belief we needed more security instead. We rewarded companies for sending jobs and profits overseas.
Part,if not most, of the problem is the fact that we as individuals have lost our spines. We shrug off offenses rather than stand up against them. We turn our backs to crap that my father's generation jumped on. It is as if we have as a Nation turned into silly putty!
Not me of course, nah I fight with every breath to right the wrongs I see! As I am sure you do yourself.
What a society we've constructed. School librarians in our nation's capital and elsewhere are reduced to begging to keep their shelves stocked (see http://filltheshelves.org/), while McConnell and his compassion-challenged, science-denying ilk work to keep the plutocracy intact.
Notblonde,
Just turned on the TV and Rep. Engle is saying words like "minimalist bill" and "down the road' and there's no time left to strike a good deal, but he says they don't want to go over the cliff!
Why the hell not? Don't give us anymore BS about accepting bad deals or "minimalist" deals!!!! No more kicking the ball down the field! No more bad deals! And President Obama, get those damn safety nets OFF the damn table!
If that's what Turtle Neck wants, then I say let's go over the cliff! No deal is better than a bad deal. Let the tax cuts expire, go up on everyone, and let the Dems offer middle class tax cuts all on their own and let the GOP block it.
Absolutely. And fire Reid's compromising a#@. How sickening to watch him toady up to the turtle. Ugh.
Go over the cliff. Save us from "minimalist" bills. Save us from bad deals that give the GOP what they want, none of which is good for the country!
What cliff? If the Bush era tax cuts are revoked the deficit will end. How many times have we seen those charts that show how the Bush tax cuts are responsible for the deficit? Are we so concerned about losing fifty bucks a month or less to the tax man (unless you are wealthy enough to be getting hundreds of thousands in tax breaks) that we are willing to let the poor starve? Are we going to tell that single parent to get a job or two at minimum wage while having to pay half their salary for childcare? Are we going to watch SSI get cut even though we all know it is not a budget item since it is not supposed to be used for anything else? Shall we let Congress decide to get away with not repaying the SSI funds they stole?
UGH, this is getting crazy!
It seems that no one here acknowledges that Washington has a spending problem. The dem agenda is one of tax and spend. There is no good faith effort to cut spending. Without it, all the taxes in the world will not right our sinking ship. Does anyone here understand that our government needs to make significant cuts? Or do we continue to spend and spend until our country is broke. ( It already is broke.) Then we will truly feel the pain! Makes more sense to feel a little pain now than to feel a lot of pain later. Maybe we won't feel it, but future generations sure will. Are you all that selfish? That is the difference between dems and republicans. Republicans are wanting to tackle difficult situations and get our fiscal house in order. Dems want business as usual. Business as usual takes us down the drain.
Oh, spare me your moronic GOP drivel.
Miss LeCarre is representative of the average level of thinking here... so yes, these people do not, nor will they ever, think there is a spending problem. Ever.
Nope, blanks.
You and jess are representative of the right wing delusional fox news watchers...so yes, people like you will continue to be right wing idiots. Always.
Of course we do. The problem is conservatives don't care about the spending problems that liberals care about. Liberals do not like defense spending and there have been proposals to do everything from cut the defense department by 10% to cut it by 50%. Liberals have also proposed modest cuts to certain contractor programs and to intelligence agencies in the nation (again up to 50%). But these cuts are ignored because they don't fit in the line with the conservative agenda. So the liberal proposals are pushed aside and the only proposals discussed are then framed under conservative arguments. That is why you end up only hearing the conservative position. That's primarily on Democrats for allowing such stupidity, but it's also on your part because you don't actually listen to the responses that you get and try to formulate understanding on the basis of such.
Historically speaking Republicans have been the spenders and Democrats have been the fiscally conservative party. Name one time in modern US history when a Republican President left his office with a surplus.
How does a nation go broke and how is our nation broke? Last time I checked our currency was among the highest valued on the market, we have more than enough money circulating, we aren't on any currency based shortages or goods based shortages, our stocks and bonds are worth more than anything else in the world and are traded at higher rates than any in the rest of the world, and we still have flowing credit. Exactly how are we "broke." Let me also ask you: has spending increased exponentially? No. Spending has actually began to decrease not increase. Do you understand that? You falsely frame this argument as though spending continues to grow and grow when it doesn't. What we need to do is get our revenues to match our spending. Part of how we do this is by ending the wars and by drawing down our massive overseas military operations. Part of how we do this is by changing the current tax rates. Do that and you eliminate almost all of the deficit. The rest requires economic growth which cannot be controlled in the way that you're describing by an act of congress.
No, Republicans are not serious about the debt. I do agree that neither party really want to face the debt or deficit, but Democrats have proposed slight more feasible answers than Republicans. The only proposals Republicans have offered are to cut assistance programs and to cut taxes. We've seen after every independent analysis and CBO report that these plans explode the deficit and national debt (our current exploded deficit and national debt are evidence of this) and that these plans end up worsening the economic situation and costing the federal government hundreds of billions of dollars per year in lost revenues.
Please name for me one program that has a spending problem, how it is a problem, and what Republicans have proposed to address that problem. And, additionally, provide evidence that this problem will actually be addressed (in other words don't just give me an article with joe Republican saying "it'll cut the deficit/it'll cut the debt" and no figures- I'm saying an independent study by a disinterested party (and, also, don't give me a partisan study, either)). If you can't do this then you really need to re-evaluate your claim that you are the one concerned about the deficit and debt.
#17.4
Again...you nailed it. Bravo, Cartoon.
A lot of the debt is from cutting taxes while starting 2 wars , that was a GOP spending problem moron
Republican contributions to debt: http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
If they would only take a little responsibility, and help us fix the problems they are primarily responsible for creating.
They want to INCREASE already over-the-top military spending to lengthen the war in Afghanistan, and buy nuclear weapons and ships we don't need. They want to keep open military bases which are absurdly obsolete and unnecessary, but they want to cut food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare and social security. They actually want to cut Meals On Wheels! I mean, my God!! Here's your choice, Republicans: Meals on wheels or a new ship no one needs or wants. They go for the new ship! WHY??
They are the big spenders. They spend money on things no one needs! Why? Defence lobbyists pay them well. I hope we go over the cliff to end this glut, this bonanza of unnecessary military spending! It's very bad for the debt and the deficit.
Why can't Obama, as commander-in-chief, say NO to this and make it final? We can't afford things no one needs or wants!
Dems are no more spendy than the other party of whos name i choose not to even say...!!. You keep saying "Dems spending" when i never hear any of you address the burst bubble of the realestate market,which not only led to our demise but the the collapse of other countries as well!... not to mention the corruption of wall street and outrageous bank lawlessness and greed!! Can you proove exclusively that the so called "Democrats" are completely responsible for our countries dept?! (i don't think so) How about the fact that the fed lies about how much money there really is! believe me America is not broke! .......Ahhhhhh... duh! hmmm? ...wonder if "all of the above" could be the culprits? not just the dems?! And in conclusion, the military budget is outrageous and inflated and a huge waste! Not to mention extraneous expenditures that would blow your mind that are not just blamed on the democrats!!.........So get over it. The debt is multifaceted and complicated and comes from both government, personal and private greed across both parties! And started years before with no regulations where there should have been! Oh ya i forget , "to regulate means we're socialist'!! Duh!! obviously can't win for lose.
Than why not go back to the proposal the President put forth before Boehner's Plan B? Why are the wealthiest in need of a higher estate-tax thresholds?
This is just stupid the President Offered the CPI Change and Boehner said no and put forth Plan B, why the hell are these people being paid salaries, benefits and expenses?
Yep, nothing like a good solid 'death tax' to punish the successful.
And the sad thing is: blanks here will never be the one he is defending on this site. Never.
Donna.#18.2
Right again! You can't defend the indefensible anyway!
What part of my question stated punishing the successful? I simply asked why are the wealthiest in need of a higher estate-tax thresholds? Are they being unfairly descriminated against on the estate-tax that they require higher thresholds? Are they on the verge of loosing large sums of money because the estate-tax threshold is so low?
The estate tax probably affects .03% of the wealthiest people. Of course the Republicans do not want to cost them a bit more for their mansions when they die.
No, cut the SS for people making an average of $22,000.00 a year or less.
This one fact alone should tell everybody who can see and hear where Republicans stand and for whom they work!
Here's the real problem:
http://www.prwatch.org/node/11907
I dare any politician to show the video on the floor of Congress, or any large media person (who is beholden to owners) to show that video.
Even the T Pubs should be burning up… But, naw, not so much apparently.
ALEC Exposed a project at PR Watch. ORG (I said .com in an older post) needs more pressure, and only a few corps. cut ties with ALEC, who if one views the video, will see is NOT democratically elected, yet they are forcing themselves upon us in so many ways.
It's not what the founders had in mind to have Commerce regulate Government, but the other way around
Here is a good description of what our problem as a country is...
US Tax Revenue: 2,170,000,000,000
Federal Budget: 3,820,000,000,000
New Debt a Year: 1,650,000,000,000
Current Nat. Debt: 16,250,000,000,000
Proposed new revenue from increasing tax rate on top 2%: $80,000,000,000
Cut out the 0′s and put it in terms we use at home
Annual Income: 21,700
Year Expenses: 38.200
Credit Card Debt: 162,500
New Debt This Year: 16,500
New additional income source: 800
We have to combine both tax increases with cuts in spending...
just saying...
stormfront's post translated:
I am a troll who is a right wing tool.
You're welcome.
Just saying....
typical Donna...she can;t discuss the facts so she attacks the person.
I guess this is another example of you not caring about anything i have to say...
just saying...
So are you rooting for us to go over the cliff, then? Cuts bloated defense, raises revenue, reduces deficit by half.
We don't add 1.6 trillion of debt a year. That is not how debts and deficits work. When you run a deficit that is the amount being spent minus the amount coming in. The difference there does not automatically translate into money taken in on a bond. For instance our current spending has been paid for since 2010 and will be up until about 2014 assuming the proposed models are concurrent. That means the US isn't taking on any more debt at this point in time (unless we, for some reason, don't pay off our interest). These two terms are not synonymous.
You can try to spin it any way you want, but if you spend $1.6 trillion more than you take in, you have to borrow the money to pay the difference. The national debt was approximately $10 Trillion when Obama took office and is now in excess of $16 trillion dollars and climbing...I guess the National Debt clock must be wrong since Cartoon says we arent taking on any more debt. I guess Obama and the rest of the politicians (both Republicans and Democrats) must be wrong also.
just saying...
typical stormfront...cry victim when called out for being a troll who tries to post bull@!$%# lies as facts.
just saying...
What?
Yes.
Yes it does.
What? Of course we are. For the fiscal year 2012, $1.1 trillion has been added to our debt. Deficit+deficit+deficit= debt.
http://news.yahoo.com/cbo-tallies-2012-deficit-1-1t-171433175.html
Shooter, What is it about facts that you are so averse to hearing?
You and the rest of the flat-earth crowd who want to ruin this country with your nonsense. You're on ignore.
Isn't there a Nascar race or something on TV that you can go watch?
AND it's MRS. LeCarre.
India...which facts are you referring to?
just asking...
India,
Stormfront act at playing dumb isn't really an act at all.
It plays dumb even after being called out. Repeatedly.
just saying....
is that you not caring about what i said again Donna?
just saying...
Is that you posting utter bull@!$%# showing everyone just how much of a right wing troll you are?
Answer that question and you will have your answer, right wing troll.
Just saying.....
No. 1.1 trillion was added to the deficit. You are confusing debt with deficit.
If the difference between spending and revenues automatically translated into national debt that means that you can never pay off debt. Do you even realize what you just stated here Shooter?
No you do not. Issuing bonds is just one of several ways that a government has for producing income. Once again: GOVERNMENT DOES NOT WORK LIKE YOUR PERSONAL CREDIT CARD. Government can print money, it can levy taxes, it can increase fixed assets, it can trade treasuries, and if government has a stake on property it can sell that property, take out loans against the value of that property, or it can rent that property. There are dozens of ways for the government to handle debt that do not automatically translate into the issue of a bond.
This is a strawman argument. What I stated is that we are not adding debt because we aren't issuing bonds at this time and the fed stated that we won't be until likely 2014 (assuming we don't get pulled into another war, the economy doesn't falter and the fed has to bail out, or there's no significant natural disaster). What this means is we've paid forward for the estimated deficit index as per the CBO's projection up to 20 trillion dollars OR the fed re-evaluates it's current treasuries/bonds. That's because we have securities covering us up to this point. The spending at this point in time is not directly tacking on to the national debt for that reason, but is rather accumulating out of already valued assets.
I hesitate to use this metaphor because making any analogies to real world things seems to have the backfiring effect of confusing people with how economics works with that of you and your individual life. But here goes:
The reason why you don't want this to happen is similar to how you wouldn't want to take out a second mortgage and then spend the entire value of your second mortgage. You might have to take out a second mortgage if a major disaster happens like, I dunno, your entire means of economic income collapsed and you are in a current fight with 2 of your neighbors, and you were already making the lowest amount of income you've made in your past 50 years of existence. So you don't want to gobble up all of that remaining 2nd mortgage. You want to fix the problems that exist on your home and property so that you can build equity thus increasing the value of your dollar thus increasing the real value you have to spend. And then use that to pay for your bills until you get a job again, your war with your neighbors ends, and you are making more money than you did before. That is what Republicans do not seem to understand.
What you are confusing here is the idea of spending and debt. You assume that if you don't have enough money debt is automatically incurred. For you or I as individuals this is true, but that doesn't automatically work the same way with the US government. Debt when you are talking about it at the US level is money that you owe for a service that hasn't yet been rendered. The only way to pay off domestic debt is to render the service. Now foreign debt works differently, but I'm going to put that aside for a moment. That is why your treasury can print money or can lend against itself and not incur debt. This is a concept that conservatives do not seem to understand and the "debt clock" that you're talking about refers to something created by an economic libertarian on Wall Street that he put up as part of his bid for office. Look up Seymour Durst.
Where in the world do you get these nutty ideas? The Fed buys new US Bonds constantly, it's called "monetizing the debt". We are selling those bonds to ourselves and yes, we will never repay our debt.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-03/treasury-scarcity-to-grow-as-fed-buys-90-of-new-bonds.html
This is probably the most rude I've ever been, but this is the single stupidest statement I've read on this blog ever and that's saying something coming from you, Shooter.
Do you understand what it means to buy something versus selling something? Do you understand what a bond is? Do you understand what the difference is between a self-owned bond versus a foreign owned bond?
Purchasing of bonds has absolutely nothing to do with the selling of bonds and this is especially stupid when considering that you're confusing foreign bonds with domestic bonds.
Monetizing the debt" means that you are purchasing back bonds that have came due SO THAT YOU CAN MAKE A PROFIT OFF THE INTEREST AND USE THAT TO PAY THE DEBT. Good @!$%#ing cheese maple syrup monkey balls. Did you just randomly open a book and look up economic terms in the glossary?! You know you have to actually READ how this @!$%# works, right? RIGHT???
Not to mention the article you linked to is nothing but praises of the action of purchasing bonds and the return investment we'll be getting as US citizens. Good lord.
On a side note I'm ever so glad that you linked that article: ya'll realize that if what that article is saying is true and we spent our money repairing our infrastructure we'd be grossing something like 200% in terms of monetary value increase, yeah? Lol that'd wipe out all of our outstanding foreign debt (at 6 trillion) and balance the budget and leave us with a surplus over approximately 10 years. Sigh John was correct: but you won't here this on the negotiating table, now will ya.
Cartoonthenews, take it easy, take a deep breath and repeat after me: "he's just a fugging troll." again: "he's just a fugging troll." again: "he's just a fugging troll."
these idiots actually understand and can see the rationale of your arguments. the only reason that they pretend not to is to piss you and me and others off. stop even replying to them. i know it's tempting but they do this kind of thing only to get reaction not for any other reason.
use that little exclamation point in the lower right corner of each of their comments. hit it and select "no value" or "inflamatory" or "spam" if you must but flag them before you even read them. you already know the primary trolls you don't even have to think about it just hit the button.
sooner or later (i suspect later) they will lose interest and go away.
Really? Then explain this to me....
How does one buy something that isn't being sold? Obviously this is some sort of semantic sleight of hand I haven't seen before, so how about doing us all a favor and link to something that describes your concept better. Meanwhile I'll offer this...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetization
Not going to do it again, huh cartoon?
It's just very frustrating how people don't listen to the things they say. He links to the Wikipedia article which expressly states what I just said in the above post. Sigh. But you're right. Scratch the hemorrhoid and it comes back 20x worse.
Good rant, Cartoon. I ignored him long ago, but hey, it's worth a shot, because I always keep in mind, someone else might read it and learn something. I thank you for that.
I do appreciate the facts being laid out and the smack down of trollishness both. I usually ignore, but at times I try to write something factual to rebut the bs being flung around.
So you have nothing that that distinguishes your POV from the Wiki article? How about something that illustrates your claim that no bonds will be sold until 2014?
Considering that the Fed doesn't issue bonds why would they be pontificating on when they'll "reappear"?
OK I give what is it that the Fed is purchasing if not US bonds? They are currently in QE3 and buying at a fast pace. What are they buyi9ng?
Turtle Lips whining to Biden....hilarious
Woman Charged Over Firefighter Ambush Gun; ABCnews; http://abcnews.go.com/News/woman-charged-york-firefighter-ambush-gun/story?id=18084774#.UODA5-RZUtg
Because we refuse to take it anymore, we are entering a new era of personal responsibility and accountability. GOP members who vote against any reasonable Senate or House fiscal deal should earn the honor of having their pictures and names front paged across America.
Actually, since many Tea Party ppl may think it's admirable to shoot the country in the foot, maybe the front pages should include a few interpretive visuals, like:
"Shooting self in foot is baaad!" http://weaponsman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/ND-shot-in-foot.jpg
(Warning: Some images may be disturbing to sensitive folks or masochistic audiences in denial!)
I'm waiting for an amusement park to come up with a ride/attraction called "The fiscal cliff"
It can be like a roller coaster or something...
"Keep your head on the headrest, your hands inside the cart, and don't forget to say "WEEEEEEE" when you go over the cliff"
(and of course all people that manage or operate the ride must be Republican)
I had a whole snarky thing planned, but I decided to skip it. I will simply ask this:
When are we going to realize, as a people, that the government no longer serves the people? Cliff or no, 98% of the people in this country are being ill-served (or downright ignored) by a fundamental institution of civil society. Government has many legitimate functions to perform, and it's performing none of them well and some, not at all.
I'm disgusted, and the american people are disgusted. And it's only going to get worse.
Unfortunately this is probably the most insightful commentary on this thread.
And by unfortunate I mean because it's so true, but also so gloomy.
I prefer kittens!
John, I am now going to go hug my Manx cat.
You are so right, I'm sorry to say.
India out.
Are you saying they're ignoring us? the electorate? on purpose? =|
Gee... I wonder what more we could do...
Nope, pew in 2010 22% trust the government: http://www.people-press.org/2010/04/18/distrust-discontent-anger-and-partisan-rancor/
Gallopin 2012 says 19%: http://www.gallup.com/poll/5392/trust-government.aspx
Cliffy, you ASSUME to know why people voted for who they voted for. That's the problem with your erroneous "number".
The fact is our electoral college (who Constitutionally elects the president) and popular vote went to our president. The one you and TPs wish to undermine, right along with everyone else, including our own economy and foreign economies.
To cheer for destroying all that?
Here's that video which isn't quite a kitten, but it sums it up fairly well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXUPDAMc_6o&feature=player_embedded#!
On Chris Hayes' show this morning the conservative simply admitted that the GOP and his guys want taxes to go up on the middle class. After all, why should the rich pay anything for what the middle class needs such as social security and medicare? the rich don't need them, and they want ONLY the middle class to pay for them.
The GOP mask is off. They will have lost the middle class completely, and they are trying like mad to slough off blame for their own desired plan onto Obama and the democrats.
The people are, with Obama's clever leadership, seeing through them now.
Not for nothing, but I shouldn't need to read Benen's concise explanation of "what's the trouble" in order to know what the trouble is. Reid's latest "my good friend across the aisle" statement was an unnecessary gift to Republicans. I'm trying to decide whether to tear my hear out now over it, or wait until I've had a couple drinks to dull the pain.
June Day,
I always wait till I've had a few drinks. It helps. If we go over the cliff at midnight New Years Eve, most people will be free to tear their hair out rather painlessly anyway!
If we go over the cliff, my hair stays intact. Bad or "minimal deal", out it comes.
But first, Champagne!
Lol, India LeCarre. (Raises glass of prosecco) Cheers. :)
Cheers! :) LOL Happy NewYear!
Indeed - Happy New Year, come what may! :)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/us/politics/obama-accuses-republicans-of-blocking-tax-deal.html?_r=1&
Senate Republicans emerged from a closed-door meeting to say they agreed with Democrats that the request — (((( for lower payments to beneficiary programs like Social Security and slow their growth.))) which had temporarily brought talks to a standstill — was not appropriate for a quick deal to avert the tax increases and spending cuts starting Jan. 1.
Mr. Reid made clear that Democrats did not intend to include Social Security in any stopgap package. Doing so would make it hard for him to round up votes from his own party, and he has resisted touching Social Security.
"We're not going to have any Social Security cuts," Mr. Reid said on the floor.
I am confused on the reporting here , I am certain it is because of confusion , and of the timing of press releases coming out of congress chaotically