Fiscal Cliff

So the 1% threw us a bone. Happy New Year. Don't forget that the Capital Gains Tax (where they make most of their money) is still only 20%, while many of us are paying 35% on every penny that we earn. And remember that they are only paying Social Security Tax on the first $113,700 that they make every year. And Congress did NOTHING to lower the deficit, so you and me still get to pay more and more interest on money that the government borrows from the 1%.

Actually he doesn't have to debate with Congress--the President represents a different branch of government, and, as such, he can simply exercise his Executive authority to either veto or sign the legislation put on his desk. He is not a king, but he is the chief executive of the country, and he has both the right, and obligation, to use that authority, and his judgment, as he sees fit, and in accord with the duties of his office.

What the President can do, and what he has been doing more often, is to use his bully pulpit and take his case directly to the American people so that they can put pressure on their Congressional representatives. Since he doesn't seem to excel at political wheeling and dealing, nor does he seem to have any great appetite for that, trying to gain public support, and influencing Congress that way, seems much more compatible with his leadership style and natural inclinations. So I expect to see even more of that in the coming weeks.

That sentiment is precisely what should be expressed by a President who doesn't want to see "the full faith and credit of the United States" become a global joke. We can't make spending cuts, or fail to raise enough revenue, to an extent that damages our credit-worthiness as a nation, because the results of that would be catastrophic.We've got to try to pay off those bills we already have, and work gradually toward amassing fewer of them, and try to balance our cash flow with some increased revenue sources in the interim.

That's always the case, due to differing views, and it's why compromise is always inevitable. And compromise will always leave some, perhaps even many, on both sides unhappy--when you want the whole loaf, having to settle for half of it is going to leave some pouting and feeling they have been cheated. Politics is the art of the deal. The best deal you can strike might not be ideal, but, pragmatically, it might be the best you can do in a particular instance--and, being able to accept that, and move on, is really what I expect from all of these people.

What I don't expect is that they wait 518 days, or something like that, until their backs are against a wall, and the economic health of the country is threatened, for them to decide on a deal.

Not exactly true. Bringing in some additional tax revenue, from those in the highest tiers, does help to lower the deficit.

I think the bill doesn't really give the middle-class all that much tax relief--particularly when increases in the payroll tax are figured in. It just spared them an even worse scenario. In that regard, I do think we were thrown a bone, and the wealthiest were left to devour their steak rather undisturbed by the howls coming from a financially-squeezed middle-class, and a country still caught in the grasp of a recession.

I am thinking, "what evidence could possibly support what Frank is saying about Democrats wanting the deal to fail as much as Republicans do? Certainly it's not anything concrete, such as the breakdown of House votes." I'm not seeing any other evidence for what you're saying either. Certainly you haven't provided any. But never mind. Don't sweat it.

I think the Congressional Republicans might as well write off votes from the Northeast part of the country, particularly the tri-state area, given their failure to act on the hurricane Sandy relief bill to aid residents in those areas. The Senate adopted a $60.4 billion aid package last week, but this House failed to act on it.

Even the Republicans who represent those areas are blasting them and their own party leadership.


And Gov. Christie of New Jersey has blasted House Republicans, and John Boehner for not calling for a vote before the new Congress is sworn in.


Gov. Cuomo of New York, a Democrat, accused the House of "dereliction of duty".

All of it adds to the perception that Republicans, particularly those in the House leadership, don't seem to care about the needs of average middle-class citizens, even when they are struggling to recover from a natural disaster. They just spent a lot more time arguing for tax breaks for the most wealthy than they did considering the needs of the average folks who have been trying to re-build their lives and communities in the wake of Hurricane Sandy.

I am certainly not going to “sweat” stuff like this, Thomas.

The irony and cynicism in my original post was damn near dripping off it. It reflected what I see as both sides realizing that the measure is essentially fluff…a thing that will not impact significantly on the deficit…or the predicament of the middle class. Couple that with the fact that both sides throughout the negotiations have been trying to score political points with more intensity than trying actually to solve the problem. The talking heads for both sides, Thomas, have come close to stand-up routines in derogating the other side’s positions and rationales.

The negative political implications for the Republicans if they were not able to cohere long enough to pass even this pathetically inadequate measure would have been monumental.

Since the Democrats realize (or I am supposing they realize) that the measure will not meaningfully impact in a positive way on the problem supposedly being dealt with anyway, I suggested that they might actually be hoping the resolution would fail…and take the political benefit of the Republican recalcitrance. That, to me, seems to be a larger benefit than they will get from efficacy of this resolution.

Apparently, however, you do not think Democrat politicians could stoop to that…so you were moved to "ire" at my cynical, ironic suggestions...actually asking for evidence to bolster it.

What could I tell ya, Thomas. Continue to look for the “supporting evidence” rather than stop and reflect on what I said; how I said it; and my explanation of it. The search might do you some good.

Didn't I tell you weeks ago that they would settle on the cliff edge so that they could all be on the TfuckingV all day long every day as if all life takes place in Washington.

They're lovin' it. Lapping it up. Your life in their hands.

Our lot are nearly as bad. There's too many captains and not enough deck hands.

It has been said that the earlier a dictator comes in the more humane he can afford to be.

For graphics wonks, here's a breakdown of the various offers from both sides leading up to the smallest of all choices that was actually voted on.



Source

Markets all up about 2% today.

So what spending was actually cut?

None. Look at the final bar in the graph above. No cuts.

The sequester was kicked down the road for two months and we'll save about 88B in interest payments over 10 years based on increased revenues from tax increases on 1%

You've expanded the 1% to include the Chinese now?

Is this what less government looks like? A natural disaster and no relief? A pathetic congress.

By best chance of offsetting additional taxes I have to pay. Not exactly a sure thing though.

Well, they'll vote Friday on a small portion of the aid, but it took a lot of public shaming of the House Republicans today to even get them to do that.

Well, Boehner succeeded in getting bi-partisan agreement--unfortunately, for him, it was a chorus of very loud and very negative comments, from both fellow Republicans as well as Democrats, about his failure to have the House vote on the Sandy relief bill that the Senate approved last week, as had been promised.

Talk about dysfunctional government...How can you have any faith in them or what they promise to do?

I don't know. I've never met anybody who had faith in them.

You may want to pay close attention beginning in early February.

A govt of the people, by the people and for the people - How did we get so lost?

i blame bad education, at home, in the schools, and in the churches.