Fiscal Cliff – where are the cuts?

[JanS]

I sit here and shake my head at the back and forth on here. “You’re lying”, “No, you’re lying”. I have nothing to add here, really.

We’re not going back to the 50’s, but..there’s got to be a better way, for so many things. Sigh. No, make that a BIG sigh !

Back to your corners, and come out fighting….

Share This

[HMC Rich]

Hi Redblack. Liberty has no ism or ist.

So you believe it to be more fascist than marxist. Fine. I don’t wholly disagree but the Fascists didn’t print out their 10 planks. But it still means too much government interfering in our lives. 16 Trillion in on-budget debt. About 120 Trillion in unfunded Mandates. China is delving a bit into those waters I believe.

We the people have let ourselves down by electing career politicians and feeding the political machines.

JanS, Show me where we would go to the 50’s. For that matter, show me where the budget of this United States in the 20th and 21st Century ever contracted? Maybe in the 20’s after Wilson.

But sadly It hasn’t. The federal government grows every year. It is spending too much and for the left to use inane scare tactics is only par for the course. Even if you use Keynesian model for deficit spending in times of recession and unemployment, the current regime ignores the fact that if the economy has recovered you are supposed to spend less. But they won’t.

Mr. Obama wants the Fiscal cliff. He wants the cuts to the military, cuts to certain programs and taxes to go up. He will naturally blame the Republicans because he doesn’t ever take true responsibility. He wants more government spending. In four years we will be up to 20 to 23 Trillion in on-budget debt. This is truly insane.

Here is a picture of what is spent in the budget. http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/budget-entitlement-programs?gclid=ci-p4f_5pbqcfyl7qgodg3ealg

62% of the budget goes towards Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and similar programs. Defense is at 19%. That leaves very little left actually for the other programs.

Boehner gave the administration an option (Plan B) that Democrats pushed two years ago. Obama balked. So all his talk when he was a Senator and candidate was just partisan rhetoric. I need to buy him some flip flops because he has certainly worn those out.

The Democrats are not even trying to cut spending. Plus, do you know if the US Government confiscated the top 2% wealth, it would last less than a month.

Your party is unreasonable and power hungry. Even taxing the Rich 100% will not fix the debt problem of too much government spending. There needs to be baseline cuts. No automatic increases. More audits to stop the waste. Hell, Reid is obligated to pass a budget and he won’t.

Your party might be winning the propaganda war but the country is losing. Eventually the rest will wise up but by then it will be too late.

Remember Al Gore. I have heard many of you write about him in favorable terms. In 2008 he sounded like a fiscal genius compared to what you guys are allowing to happen under the current President.

Now, Clinton Gore kind of forget about the

Republican House that helped sort out much of the spending, but beyond that, look what he was saying in 2008 concerning debt, taxes, and spending.

http://www.algore2008.net/accomplishments2.html

Your party is running the country into oblivion and that is why we Republicans took this Presidential loss so hard.

Clinton and Gore had plenty of common sense. I see none coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I see Obama getting what he wants. The US in decline while equalizing us with (in his view) the rest of the world.

I guess I am bitter. Why Yes I am come to think of it. The War on Poverty is winning. The government is turning the middle class into the class of poverty. Thanks a lot you political greedmeisters.

The leaders of the Democratic party do not care about you. All they care about is power. That is why they scream loudly every time a state changes to a Right to Work state. The same goes for the RNC. All they want is power too and are not listening to their base. These bums need to thrown out of office.

Share This

[JanS]

Rich…not just the Dems. Do you honestly think that Boehner and his pals give a damn about you and me? Yes, we have the power of the vote, and it’s about time we used it. I finally realized that Mr. Boehner cares only about losing his speaker’s seat…and that’s why he goes back and forth. I call him a Mugwump….that’s someone who sits on a fence, with his mug on one side, his wump on the other. Yep, disillusioned. Rich, both parties are power hungry..it’s not just the Dems…so get over it ..

Share This

[skeeter]

“i’m talking about guys like willard romney”

Are you saying that Romney doesn’t pay his taxes properly? Because I think he does.

And as for Exxon, Coca Cola, etc – these are public companies. You can look up their tax rate in their audited financial statements. I’ve done this exercise before on another thread a couple months ago.

Share This

[JoB]

JanS..

do you mean to tell me i have been regulated to a corner without my consent?

THAT IS UN-AMERICAN

and i won’t stand for it ;->

Share This

[wakeflood]

OK, so this thread has hit 4 pages long. Does anyone even remember the initial question?

The phrase “trench warfare” is starting to resonate in my head.

Maybe we need a Christmas truce? I’ll start the first verse of Silent Night and see if I hear an echo from across no man’s land. :-)

Share This

[JoB]

HMCRich

“Mr. Obama wants the Fiscal cliff.”

in what universe is this statement true?

The republicans want universal cuts to programs that benefit individual citizens and to make the Bush tax cuts permanent for the most wealthy… but they would be ok with restoring all taxes for the middle class and eliminating the mortgage interest deduction…

saying no to that doesn’t indicate a desire for the fiscal cliff…

yesterdays news was that Obama was perfectly willing to inflict permanent pain on the nation’s most needy by changing the way that social security benefits are calculated in such a way that it would freeze benefits at today’s levels while costs escalated…

that doesn’t show a desire to go over the fiscal cliff…

unfortunately it doesn’t show a desire to honor the platform on which he was elected either:(

Share This

[JoB]

skeeter..

how would you know that willard paid the correct amount of taxes?

He wasn’t willing to show America his tax returns..

perhaps because they would reveal just how much he benefits from that law firm he hires to oversee his taxes.

the Americans paying the top affective rate in taxes are upper middle class taxpayers..

not those with armies of accountants…

and quite frankly Skeeter.. if they are paying you to help them with their taxes and they are still paying the top affective rate..

they aren’t getting their money’s worth out of you, are they?

Share This

[wakeflood]

but the mortar shells continue to rain down on both sides, interrupting the frail and ghostly voices, “…all is calm, all is bright…” ;-)

Share This

[wakeflood]

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for open debate, as is made obvious by my own repeated volleys, but at some point, don’t we all reach the conclusion that this small gang of 8+/- are shouting at the rain? I’m purdy sure we aren’t changing hearts and minds between us.

Believe me, I wish I was wrong about that. Maybe I am?

Anyone care to offer that they’ve significantly modified their positions on this topic? (Which, btw, is just another straw man for the L vs. R debate that these various threads degrade to.)

Maybe the whole point is that we throw enough spaghetti at the wall that when some centrist meanders by one of these discussions, that they might be strongly influenced by something they read? If that’s the case, then that’s worthwhile. I just wish I could see who’s logged into each thread to see if we’re really just talking to ourselves.

Oh well…carry on as you see fit. (Not that you wouldn’t.) ;-)

Share This

[JoB]

wakeflood

i hear what you are saying…

and would sing with you but you did’t offer me the option of both singing and posting …

a written venue is the only one in which other people would willing listen to me sing ;->

i am often tempted to stop posting except on those days when my body literally won’t let me do anything else..

just when i have decided to give my morning posting up, somewhere out in the real world someone asks me if i am JoB.

I have often wondered if that would be the appropriate time to duck under the mantle of anonymity…

but i have made a conscious choice not to be anonymous on this blog so i smile and answer yes.

to my great surprise, the people who stop me mostly want to thank me for speaking up.

Sometimes they shyly offer their sign in names.. but most of the time they tell me they don’t post but they regularly read..

and some of what i say makes them think.

i happen to know that i am not the only poster on the West Seattle Blog who makes people think.

the few i hang out with have had similar encounters out in that real world that surprise and sometimes puzzle them.

And if it happens to us, i think it must happen to other people to…

even if only in overhearing a conversation in which your handle is referenced :(

yup.. that happened to me. Someone once talked to me about Job.

Yes, i disclosed.. but i was ever so tempted not to ;)

i have my moments, you know:)

strangely, i think that is what people like about me..

when they like anything about me :)

the most effective tool any of us has in our personal toolbox is education…

and if a political wonk like me has learned things she didn’t know from other posters..

then the education part of this blog is working just fine.

but i get your drift. it is the season.

The merriest of Christmases to each and every person who posts or lurks or simply gets their morning humor break from the WSB forums…

i am christian.. that is what i personally celebrate …

but i acknowledge you might choose to celebrate something else or nothing at all

i could offer to spit in your eye.. but that is so not in the spirit of my season ..

so you will simply have to bear with my goofy grin and good wishes and interpret them in whatever fashion makes you happy.

i love to be wished happiness in someone else’s season…

i’d sing. but someone in my house seems to have hidden my music:(

i bet it was the dogs. they have no appreciation for my vocal renditions.

but hubby is home sick today an it could as easily be him…

bah humbug!

Wait.. did someone just say something that stupid while i was typing ???? :(

it will take me a minute because i have to edit.. a lot… but i am sure i have something to say about that…

Share This

[JoB]

btw.. my humor often doesn’t come across that well

all is can say is that i gave it my best sweet little sarcastic old lady shot.

Share This

[skeeter]

JoB:

“and quite frankly Skeeter.. if they are paying you to help them with their taxes and they are still paying the top affective rate..

they aren’t getting their money’s worth out of you, are they?”

JoB, I think that statement /question is entirely unfair. Disagreeing with my position is fair. Saying I haven’t thought through my beliefs is fair. Saying I’ve been duped/tricked by the right wing is fair.

But implying that I do not do a good job at my chosen profession and my clients are not well served is a personal attack. That is entirely uncalled for. I don’t believe I have ever made a personal attack on these forums. And if I have, I sincerely apologize.

I’m going to take a break from the political forums. I’m not having fun anymore. Goodbye to the folks (left and right) I have enjoyed chatting with.

Share This

[wakeflood]

…INCOMING!!…KABOOOOM!!

Share This

[JoB]

skeeter..

i apologize if i inadvertently offended you.

i didn’t mean to imply that you are not good at your job…

on the contrary…

i assume you do a good job for your clients..

and as such they aren’t paying the top taxable rate on all of their income…

and that is the point..

those who have more money to work with have more options to convert taxable wage income into income that is not taxed at all or taxed at a much lower rate.

those who don’t have disposable income don’t have that choice..

therefore they end up paying a much higher percentage of their income in actual direct and indirect taxes.

my best friend thinks hubby and I fools for not choosing to shelter more of hubby’s wages…

she and her spouse earn double our income in taxable wages and pay half of our tax bill :(

and by the way.. politically she is a screaming liberal… go figure.

Share This

[JoB]

today President Obama put 3 months food money for seniors on the table as a negotiating tactic with Republicans who want something in return for averting the fiscal cliff they created.

I am ashamed of my nation.

Share This

[wakeflood]

I’m already going back on my desire to not post on politics but I can’t help myself. Here’s what I’ve been TAUGHT to believe by this President, who I voted for twice:

1. He talks a good progressive line but he has a far lower bottom line than I wish he did.

2. He will cave.

He has shown that he would rather take the heat from the left than to do the right thing. He wants to be known as a deal-broker. The centrist who got things done. Unfortunately, he knows what we want to hear and is perfectly willing to say it while he negotiates lots of it away behind closed doors.

He is a Nixonian Democrat.

Share This

[JoB]

yup Wake.. that’s who we both voted for..

i don’t know about you..

but i wasn’t happy about it then.. and i am definitely not happy about it now.

on top of that, today i received a questionnaire via email from the democratic party .. you know.. fill in their boxes and then make a comment.. followed by a request for funds.

i told them the same thing i have told them for the last 4 years. when they started governing like democrats.. i would fund them.

in the meantime, third party candidates are looking more attractive

Share This

[redblack]

wakeflood: hey, dude/dudette, if these debates make you a little queasy, we can get you an easy chair in the corner and you can just watch. you want a fainting chair, too? maybe a hand fan to whisk away the vapors?

just kidding.

look. i think it’s important to dispel with the political talking points. guys like skeeter know that liberals aren’t trying to enact some bolshevik plot when we talk about taxation. we just want a return to a pre-reagan progressive tax code that is weighted toward wealth and is more lenient on the impoverished. it worked through the 50’s and 60’s to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio, and it can work again.

but there are others who casually toss out the word “socialist” and act as if they know the inner workings of liberal democrats’ minds – even though 9 times out of 10 they got their notions from some liar like bill o’reilly. seriously? i was just told about 30 posts ago that democrats are enacting the 10 planks of marxism. in what freaking world is that an honest political debate?

i won’t apologize for trying to dispel those myths, and i do it for the purpose of having honest debates.

and i don’t know if anyone has ever reported any of my posts to the editors here, and frankly, i don’t care. i try to be respectful, but i won’t cow to republican/conservative/libertarian bullies. i call it like i see it… with the full understanding that i do so at the generosity of our hostess.

and sure, i’d like to see some compromise from our elected officials, but i’m a (union) democrat. i don’t think it makes any sense whatsoever for democrats to be expected to govern like republicans, especially after the past 30 years of low taxes and low wages.

what was the original topic?

i believe it was austerity, and the OP asked why we’re not slashing spending to balance the budget – despite the fact that obama has offered over $1.4 trillion in cuts since 2011.

meanwhile, republicans refuse to admit that austerity is going to ruin this country while simultaneously yelling about socialism and ignoring the fact that free market capitalism has utterly failed america during the recent recession.

one thing i will apologize for, though, is my verbosity.

sorry.

Share This

[redblack]

rich: you need to read up on mussolini. fascist italy was run by corporations. i’m tempted to point out who they allied with during WW2, but that would end the debate, and i would lose.

(look up godwin’s law and its various corollaries, too, while you’re out a-googlin’.)

and even today, over 90% of italy’s media is owned by silvio berlusconi, who used his private ownership of that media to become prime minister.

that’s fascism. and it looks a lot like american capitalism – except with fewer regulations.

Share This

[wakeflood]

Hey Red/Black, I was never asking anyone to apologize for their postings. And I don’t apologize for mine, either. I was only expressing some concern that we had some entrenched positions between the warring factions and that it was driving me batty to read the back and forths. It gets to be like people speaking entirely different languages. Or people yelling/typing over the top of each other.

I just needed a break and thought that since this particular thread had gone on for pages with the same few participants that maybe this one could be put down for a holiday rest and some other fresh threads could start and maybe entice some other participants. That’s all.

I will rejoin the fray in some other thread as I’m a proud fighter for progressive thinking also. I truly believe that the facts are on our side and that our Right Wing Media can’t win on the facts so they use lies and propagate a destructive meme: that trickle down economics and “free markets” (which only exist in theory) solve our woes. They don’t. They’re a root cause of them.

And after literally years of “discussing” these issues with several wingers, I’ve come to the conclusion that many don’t want to be swayed by reality. Their constructs are so embedded that any movement toward the other side would implode their entire belief system. So what’s the point of wasting breath with facts and dialogue.

See you in the next battle, comrades.

PS – I’m a dude.

Share This

[meg]

JoB,

“why do you ignore South America where stimulus has actually worked?

pick your poison.. they have done everything from walking away from their debt to paying off their debt.. but most of their plans have one thing in common.. job creation .. public works .. and what some call social engineering..a public safety net that spends public program dollars the most efficient way possible.. with prevention.”

South America hasn’t done anything, JoB. SA is not sovereign, it’s not a country, it’s only a geographical land mass. How can someone speak to your arguments without knowing which country you refer? I could be wrong, but my own guess is that you are actually trying to reference Brazil here. Problem is, Brazil is an EMERGING economy while the US is a wealthy VERY DEVELOPED economy, with first world status. Comparing Brazil to the US is apples to oranges. In fact, in 2012 the IMF lists nearly all the SA countries as “emerging or developing economies” in the same list as South Africa for example.

What’s that got to do with anything, you ask? First, that means Brazil is “under-developed”, unlike the rich United States. That’s something that attracts private investment, as long as govts aren’t beating nationalization drums. Brazil has lots of extremely poor rural areas and far-flung villages that don’t have clean drinking water, don’t have schools, no electricity, etc. So, as Brazil starts developing, they use public works dollars to build some very basic infrastructure for their country, they’ve privatized some previously public institutions …and they they’ve made private investment Attractive. No comparison to the US, that did that work over 100 years ago. So, we are no longer a developing market. Secondly, to back up a little. Way before this, Brazil’s currency went through a couple decades of terrible hyper-inflation (up to 30000% at one point). Why? Well, pre-1980s Brazil racked up so much debt that it eventually exceeded national tax revenues and their capacity to pay. When their currency eventually collapsed, chaos broke out in the country. Through the 1980s and 1990s everyone in their population was hurt, but the middle class and the poor were hurt the most during this time of impoverishing hyper-inflation that wiped out ALL Savings, except for those who could convert to foreign currencies and put all their wealth overseas. Brazilians elected different regimes who tried various schemes to try and stabilize the currency, but Brazil’s currency failed stabilization attempts, over and over, and inflation got even worse. The military took over. Citizens fled the country, trying to find a better life overseas. For almost 2 decades it was terrible time to be in Brazil. Then, they were miraculously able to stabilize their currency with a confidence scheme hatched in the US. But what does that mean? Well, that long hyper-inflation period hammered savers but favored debtors, especially the Brazilian govt that paid their debt in inflated currency. Think about paying off your fixed $10,000 debt with dollars that are now worth 10X less than before. You’re essentially paying your creditor $1,000 in current hyper-inflated dollars, i.e. you got $10,000 worth of goods but your lender will only be able to turn around & purchase $1,000 of goods with the money you just paid him. It’s a Fabulous deal for debtors, and a crisis for lenders and savers.

Back to the comparison topic. Additionally, any trade comparison between the US and Brazil fails. Brazil exports (relatively) cheap raw materials while the US exports expensive finished goods. Actually, you could compare Brazil to our colonies right around the time of the American Revolution. The colonists traded with England – exporting their cheap cotton and importing expensive cloth. They exported cheap lumber and imported expensive furniture. Brazil is somewhat the same, except they DO manufacture, for domestic consumption, very very bad quality but cheap goods. Bad quality is one reason why you don’t see Brazilian-manufactured goods in our US stores. They’re crap – but, I guess, it’s good enough for their population because they are cheap enough to afford. Brazil, tho, has lots of raw resources, mining and minerals. And they have been betting on that Horse from China. For a while they’ve been lucky that China is ahead of them and developing like mad. But, I fear, Brazil’s good days may be over as China contracts due to slowed US consumption. Funny thing, huh? Americans gripe about crappy Chinese products, yet those are better than Brazil’s own manufactured products. Yet, the very best quality is still made by first world developed nations, like the US. But the catch is, our manufacturing makes very expensive goods. We make 787s, we make washing machines, etc. How many people on the globe buy a 787 for their family? LOL! But how many can afford a washing machine? How many a car? Etc. Most of the world’s people can only purchase crap – if they can purchase anything at all, besides food.

OK, I’m just trying to say. Comparing Brazil to the US is very wacky. Even China tho it’s still developing, at least most all Chinese citizens have had access for a long time to clean drinking water and schools, roads, etc. So, the best comparisons with the US really are countries that are very developed (preferably first world status), and have debts that are exceeding their GDP or revenues. The task is to build data sets from those comparisons, to see what choices we may have, or preview what could happen here.

You know, at some point the US may go through a similar very painful process, reach a bottom, and eventually someday become one of those developing economies. Not attractive to believers in the American “lifestyle”. Then again, you said it well…pick your poison.

Share This

[JoB]

Meg..

how astute of you to figure out that there are several countries in South America…

thus my reference to several different solutions to the same problem… financial crisis or collapse of such an order that the World Bank counselled austerity.

austerity was pretty much rejected by our South American neighbors who would be amused at your categorization of them as emerging economies…

i think they would characterize themselves as re-emerging economies

that they have moved past the need for austerity to be classified as emerging by you does sort of prove my point though.

Share This

[meg]

“South American neighbors who would be amused at your categorization of them as emerging economies…”

“to be classified as emerging by you…”

Psst JoB, LOL this classification is OLD news to them. I never classified or categorized, I just referred to their “Emerging” status given by the following Analysts within the last year or two – some of the lists updated as recently as July and November of 2012:

* The IMF

* The S&P

* Columbia U’s EMGP

* FTSE List of Emerging Economies

* MSCI Barra

* S&P List

* DowJones List

* Frontier Strategy

* BBVA Research

* Emerging Market Index

Fascinating the countries that used to be Junk rated are becoming Investment grade, while those who are (or were recently) Investment grade are becoming Junk. Spain comes to mind. Here’s a great BBC hour-long documentary on what’s happening currently in Spain:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldu8X_UQPRA

Share This

[redblack]

sure they’re becoming investment-grade, meg. they’re becoming industrialized and making the stuff that we buy. meanwhile, we’re becoming de-industrialized and running a huge trade imbalance.

when industrialized countries stop making their own stuff, they’re not going to succeed for very long. wages suffer, the economy contracts, business moves offshore, the government loses its revenue base.

this all sounds familiar…

Share This

[Author]

Posts