If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Congressional Budget Office: "Fiscal cliff" caused by the Congress, and the Administration, is worse for the economy than we thought   (reuters.com) divider line 96
    More: Fail, Congressional Budget Office, Medicare and Medicaid  
•       •       •

1156 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Aug 2012 at 1:54 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



96 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-22 11:59:57 AM
The administration's main failing in this was simple: not giving the Republicans each and every thing they demanded.
 
2012-08-22 12:01:49 PM
explain how the administration is at fault here? this is 100 percent the fault of congress and its republican leaders.
 
2012-08-22 12:01:55 PM
Arbitrarily cutting government spending 10% across the board has negative consequences?

You don't say.
 
2012-08-22 12:04:21 PM

FlashHarry: explain how the administration is at fault here? this is 100 percent the fault of congress and its republican leaders.


I love how they're squealing about the cuts to military spending, but nothing else.
 
2012-08-22 12:07:18 PM

FlashHarry: explain how the administration is at fault here? this is 100 percent the fault of congress and its republican leaders.


Who pass appropriations that never see the light of day in the Senate?

But the agreement that's going to cause the "fiscal cliff" issue was brokered among the three.
 
2012-08-22 12:09:23 PM

Marcus Aurelius: I love how they're squealing about the cuts to military spending, but nothing else.


Since those are the biggest portion of discretionary spending.....

Everything else has been cut, and is really meaningless. You could cut CPB funding completely, and it'd fix problems for, oh, a few hours.
 
2012-08-22 12:10:11 PM
Why I'm sure this means that they will "have no choice" but to renew all the tax cuts for the rich yet again. Darn. They didn't want to do that sooooo bad.

Former President Bill Clinton told CNBC Tuesday that the US economy already is in a recession and urged Congress to extend all the tax cuts due to expire at the end of the year.

"What I think we need to do is find some way to avoid the fiscal cliff, to avoid doing anything that would contract the economy now, and then deal with what's necessary in the long term debt-reduction plans as soon as they can, which presumably would be after the election," Clinton said.
 

Bill Clinton already spilled this year's excuse for extending tax cuts for the rich back at the beginning of June.

Then he very petulantly admitted that he screwed up by letting this bipartisan excuse for extending tax cuts for the rich slip before the election.

"I'm very sorry about what happened," Clinton said in an interview to air on CNN's "The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer." "I thought something had to be done on the 'fiscal cliff' before the election. Apparently nothing has to be done until the first of the year."

As far as the whole concept of the "fiscal cliff" goes. Our fiscal cliff is caused by the tax cuts. Extending the tax cuts will not fix them.

The term "fiscal cliff" sounds scary and implies a situation in which the budget deficit will dramatically worsen if no one intervenes. But the undeniable fact is it would dramatically improve if Congress simply does nothing - and stops extending the tax cuts!

In fact, the CBO has published yet another report indicating that the federal budget deficit would stabilize if not for the budget-busting legislation that most observers expect Congress to enact when it extends all kinds of tax breaks into 2013. And the report confirms that the measure that would add the most to the deficit would be an extension of the Bush tax cuts.
 
2012-08-22 12:14:58 PM
Wont't somebody think of the poor bankers that finance this brinkmanship.
I'll bet my life there is PROFIT, HUGE FARKING PROFIT for somebody(s), somewhere, somehow in this stupid charade.
 
2012-08-22 12:15:31 PM

FlashHarry: explain how the administration is at fault here? this is 100 percent the fault of congress and its republican leaders.


Aside from Obama fighting his own party to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich the last time they should have expired?

If Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., is to be believed, President Obama is casting the upcoming House vote on the tax cut deal in very stark terms.

"The White House is putting on tremendous pressure, making phone calls," DeFazio said on CNN's Parker Spitzer. "The president's making phone calls saying that's the end of his presidency if he doesn't get this bad deal."


If you think the leadership of either party is anything but totally owned by the obscenely wealthy, you haven't been paying attention.
 
2012-08-22 12:16:45 PM

BullBearMS: you haven't been paying attention.


WELL THANK GOODNESS YOU'RE HERE THEN
 
2012-08-22 12:17:49 PM

BullBearMS: If you think the leadership of either party is anything but totally owned by the obscenely wealthy, you haven't been paying attention.


Yes yes, both sides are equally bad, so vote Republican. We know.
 
2012-08-22 12:18:29 PM

snocone: Wont't somebody think of the poor bankers that finance this brinkmanship.
I'll bet my life there is PROFIT, HUGE FARKING PROFIT for somebody(s), somewhere, somehow in this stupid charade.


The last time they extended the tax cuts for the rich, they claimed that without extending them the "job creators" wouldn't be able to create jobs.

Haven't you noticed us creep back up to total employment since then?

This is about the rich legally dodging their fair share of taxes and both political parties looking for an excuse to make that happen again.
 
2012-08-22 12:26:29 PM

BullBearMS: FlashHarry: explain how the administration is at fault here? this is 100 percent the fault of congress and its republican leaders.

Aside from Obama fighting his own party to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich the last time they should have expired?

If Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., is to be believed, President Obama is casting the upcoming House vote on the tax cut deal in very stark terms.

"The White House is putting on tremendous pressure, making phone calls," DeFazio said on CNN's Parker Spitzer. "The president's making phone calls saying that's the end of his presidency if he doesn't get this bad deal."

If you think the leadership of either party is anything but totally owned by the obscenely wealthy, you haven't been paying attention.


It would be so nice to see the real puppeteers outed.
Maybe they will hire more stupid than Ryan and spill some good beans.
Fat chance, I am sure it would be fatal.
 
2012-08-22 12:29:01 PM

cameroncrazy1984: BullBearMS: If you think the leadership of either party is anything but totally owned by the obscenely wealthy, you haven't been paying attention.

Yes yes, both sides are equally bad, so vote Republican. We know.


Both sides intend to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich yet again and then slice the fark out of the social safety net programs.

This has been obvious for some time now.

Legislation to accomplish these goals will have no problem passing in the lame duck session of Congress, just like it did after the last elections.

The "fiscal cliff" is this years excuse for screwing over everyone who isn't rich, but nobody was supposed to bring it up until after the elections.

Last time it was the "job creators", but nobody is going to fall for that one again. We've seen how many jobs they created after the last time we extended the Bush tax cuts.
 
2012-08-22 12:30:04 PM
Obama offered the Rethuglicans a 10 to 1 deal. For each tax increase, he would offset it would ten spending cuts.

They rejected it out of hand, drove the country to the brink and the result was a lowered credit rating and a near default on our obligations.

Fark the GOP.

Today's GOP is the greatest threat the United States has ever faced.
 
2012-08-22 12:35:22 PM
I'm pretty sure that threatening harm (default of the United States) to a group of people in exchange for certain social, religious, economic, or political goals being met is terrorism.

WATERBOARD THE REPUBLICANS
 
2012-08-22 12:37:05 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: Today's GOP is the greatest threat the United States has ever faced.


Imperial Japan has nothing on the crying orange guy from Ohio, amirite?

That nothing permanent has been done since 1993 is a bigger problem.
 
2012-08-22 12:40:58 PM

BullBearMS: The "fiscal cliff" is this years excuse for screwing over everyone who isn't rich


On this, we agree.

I don't have a clue how to stop this train. Having the zombie eyed granny starver on the ticket hasn't changed their view that the Grand Bargain to slash 4 trillion in government programs in the middle of an epic slump is still great policy and even better politics. But don't worry. They'll ask millionaires to "pay a little more" so it's all good. I'm feeling more "confident" already.

Basically we have a choice between the Republican dystopian hellscape or the Democrats' long slow jobless recovery with even more insecurity for the poor and middle class. Or actually, it's more likely to be a "compromise" between the two. After all, these are the opening bids. Link
 
2012-08-22 12:45:08 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: Obama offered the Rethuglicans a 10 to 1 deal. For each tax increase, he would offset it would ten spending cuts.

They rejected it out of hand, drove the country to the brink and the result was a lowered credit rating and a near default on our obligations.

Fark the GOP.

Today's GOP is the greatest threat the United States has ever faced.


Jury is still out untill we see the next three Supreme Justices.
That could be a game changer.

/hope so
 
2012-08-22 12:52:38 PM

snocone: Jury is still out untill we see the next three Supreme Justices.
That could be a game changer.


Because SCOTUS has so much bearing on the budgetary stalemate on Capitol Hill..........
 
2012-08-22 12:54:21 PM

hurdboy: snocone: Jury is still out untill we see the next three Supreme Justices.
That could be a game changer.

Because SCOTUS has so much bearing on the budgetary stalemate on Capitol Hill..........


Yes they will.
With Congress all farked, legislation is going to flow from the bench.

The legislation, it must flow.
 
2012-08-22 12:57:47 PM

BullBearMS: Both sides intend to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich yet again and then slice the fark out of the social safety net programs.


I don't see Obama offering to extend the tax cuts again. The only reason he did it last time was to preserve unemployment benefits. That's not happening this year. The tax cuts will expire.
 
2012-08-22 01:05:27 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: I don't have a clue how to stop this train.


Although there are still some rank and file Dems, especially in the House, who care about people who aren't rich, as a whole we have a choice between the Republicans and the other Republicans when it comes to serving the interests of the obscenely wealthy.

Just look at the results of President Obama's bipartisan Debt Commission which released it's report right before the last lame duck Congress went into session.

Big shock. They wanted to cut taxes yet farther for the rich, disallow the most useful tax deductions for the middle class and slice the hell out of the social safety net programs for the poor. Mind you, that was the bipartisan consensus.

How, exactly, did a deficit-cutting commission become a commission whose first priority is cutting tax rates, with deficit reduction literally at the bottom of the list?

Actually, though, what the co-chairmen are proposing is a mixture of tax cuts and tax increases - tax cuts for the wealthy, tax increases for the middle class. They suggest eliminating tax breaks that, whatever you think of them, matter a lot to middle-class Americans - the deductibility of health benefits and mortgage interest - and using much of the revenue gained thereby, not to reduce the deficit, but to allow sharp reductions in both the top marginal tax rate and in the corporate tax rate.

It will take time to crunch the numbers here, but this proposal clearly represents a major transfer of income upward, from the middle class to a small minority of wealthy Americans. And what does any of this have to do with deficit reduction?

Let's turn next to Social Security. There were rumors beforehand that the commission would recommend a rise in the retirement age, and sure enough, that's what Mr. Bowles and Mr. Simpson do. They want the age at which Social Security becomes available to rise along with average life expectancy. Is that reasonable?

The answer is no, for a number of reasons - including the point that working until you're 69, which may sound doable for people with desk jobs, is a lot harder for the many Americans who still do physical labor.

But beyond that, the proposal seemingly ignores a crucial point: while average life expectancy is indeed rising, it's doing so mainly for high earners, precisely the people who need Social Security least. Life expectancy in the bottom half of the income distribution has barely inched up over the past three decades. So the Bowles-Simpson proposal is basically saying that janitors should be forced to work longer because these days corporate lawyers live to a ripe old age.


Just remember how popular talk of cutting Social Security was the last time a lame duck Congress was in session.

Both parties want to cut taxes for the rich and screw over everyone else. They just don't want to be held responsible for their actions, so they look for excuses like the "fiscal cliff" and then try to pass the legislation after the elections are safely past.
 
2012-08-22 01:15:01 PM

cameroncrazy1984: BullBearMS: Both sides intend to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich yet again and then slice the fark out of the social safety net programs.

I don't see Obama offering to extend the tax cuts again. The only reason he did it last time was to preserve unemployment benefits. That's not happening this year. The tax cuts will expire.


Because right before an election would be a terrible time to keep the Republicans from screwing over the unemployed?

This President negotiates down from a position of strength better than any politician in our recent history. It is too late now to go back and ask why the President, why the wobbly Democratic leadership, whiffed on its chance to force John Boehner to put his money where his mouth was. In September Boehner said if he had no other option, of course he would vote to extend tax breaks only for the middle class.

So the President and the Democrats gave him another option, naturally. But didn't extending the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy became necessary to get Republican support for extending the jobless benefits? Nonsense.

Five times in the last two years, the Republicans have gone along with extending those jobless benefits, and they've done it without being bribed with tax cuts for the rich. Even now Boehner's September confession, and the GOP's unwillingness to take the blame for killing off jobless benefits, offered an alternative blueprint for this President:

Let the law expire as scheduled in 24 days. Let all the tax breaks go, and when the Republicans take over the House and try to pass them anew, if they somehow are not stopped in the Senate, veto anything that does not keep tax cuts for the middle class and unemployment benefits as the dog, and perks for the rich as the tail. The GOP is still terrified of being blamed for cutting off the unemployed. You take that fact and you break them with it.


I can't believe anyone would be willing to keep offering that lame ass excuse for Obama fighting his own party to extend the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
 
2012-08-22 01:22:48 PM

snocone: Yes they will.
With Congress all farked, legislation is going to flow from the bench.

The legislation, it must flow.


With a Roberts-led court? I'm skeptical. More likely? One of the justices dies, and there's a vacancy because whoever is in the minority in the Senate next Congress actually does filibuster the replacement's confirmation.
 
2012-08-22 01:24:11 PM
Why are we broke? Romney paid his 13%
 
2012-08-22 01:56:05 PM
What you mean Keynesian economics is true?

It will be funny to see the conservative filling up this thread attacking Democrats using Keynesian economic principals.
 
2012-08-22 01:56:54 PM

Blues_X: The administration's main failing in this was simple: not giving the Republicans each and every thing they demanded.


Boner only got 98% of what he wanted.
 
2012-08-22 01:59:07 PM

hurdboy: Who pass appropriations that never see the light of day in the Senate?


No one? The Bill that was passed in the House was voted down in the Senate in April. Its the House's turn now.
 
2012-08-22 02:01:37 PM
johnryan51

Why are we broke? Romney paid his 13%



His 13 percent is more than you will pay in a life time.
 
2012-08-22 02:03:42 PM
"Fiscal cliff" caused by the Congress, and the Administration, is worse for the economy than we thought

Yeah, anyone who thinks about it for more than a minute realizes this.
 
2012-08-22 02:06:32 PM
You know, if we would just pay our taxes and stop buying so much shiat imported from other countries, all of our problems would go away.

I am trying to buy a new BBQ grill right now and the only brand that still makes them in the US is Canadian. Ten years ago I bought an inexpensive grill for $150 and it was made in the US. Now they all are. The same situation can be found across all non-military manufacturing. The huge hole in our budget is caused by un/underemployed workers not paying taxes. Get them working again and we can start turning around this deficit.
 
2012-08-22 02:06:58 PM
Well since expenditures has exceeded revenue, we are due for a shock. We need to cut expenditures and increase revenue.
 
2012-08-22 02:07:20 PM
tax the rich an extra 3% and give it directly to those making less than 80K for a family of four. that will boost the fark out of the economy.
 
2012-08-22 02:08:05 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: Obama offered the Rethuglicans a 10 to 1 deal. For each tax increase, he would offset it would ten spending cuts.

They rejected it out of hand, drove the country to the brink and the result was a lowered credit rating and a near default on our obligations.

Fark the GOP.

Today's GOP is the greatest threat the United States has ever faced.


I think to be fair they are still only the second greatest threat the United States has ever faced - but a lot of GOP supporters still wave the flag of the greatest threat. I could also see an argument McCarthyism and the overreaction to the threat of communism might have been greater. Of course the GOP still seem to be accelerating, so maybe they can take that No 1 spot they so covet in the near future.
 
2012-08-22 02:08:21 PM
FlashHarry

explain how the administration is at fault here? this is 100 percent the fault of congress and its republican leaders.


The U.S. government will run a deficit of $1.1 trillion in fiscal 2012 - how do you blame this on Republicans?
 
2012-08-22 02:09:45 PM

BullBearMS: As far as the whole concept of the "fiscal cliff" goes. Our fiscal cliff is caused by the tax cuts. Extending the tax cuts will not fix them.


The "fiscal cliff" is an artifice created by Congress for political reasons. It isn't caused by tax cuts. Tax cuts will create deficits, which will be very helpful to get the economy going again.

However, if you want to increase taxes on the rich, make sure they are offset by further cuts to the less rich.
 
2012-08-22 02:09:54 PM
So the CBO says fark the deficit..........
 
2012-08-22 02:10:22 PM

Citrate1007: So the CBO says fark the deficit..........


They should.
 
2012-08-22 02:14:42 PM

Citrate1007: So the CBO says fark the deficit..........


Yep lets keep farking that chicken. So when we can no longer keep up this unsustainable system, we can have a soviet style collapse. Cant wait.

/Its better to put off responsibility for as long as possible.
 
2012-08-22 02:14:46 PM
You mean austerity measures are bad? But I was told we have a spending problem...
 
2012-08-22 02:18:44 PM
Economic growth under this optimistic scenario would be modest in 2013 at 1.7 percent, with an 8.0 percent unemployment rate compared with 9.1 percent should the U.S. go over the fiscal cliff.

So if Obama is re-elected and Republicans can still effectively block legislation after November, we're doomed, just so the Republicans can blame Obama.
 
2012-08-22 02:21:04 PM

SquiggelyGrounders: Yep lets keep farking that chicken. So when we can no longer keep up this unsustainable system, we can have a soviet style collapse. Cant wait.

/Its better to put off responsibility for as long as possible.


What part is unsustainable?
 
2012-08-22 02:23:38 PM

Stile4aly: You mean austerity measures are bad? But I was told we have a spending problem...


Mitt has the fix; just stop spending money on poor people...weapons manufactures get a raise
 
2012-08-22 02:24:08 PM

karnal: johnryan51

Why are we broke? Romney paid his 13%


His 13 percent is more than you will pay in a life time.


Oh he's rich so its ok. I'll just sit here and wait for the crumbs to fall from the 1% table. I'll pay my 30% because I won't make as much as him in my lifetime. No wonder the country is going to hell with nitwits like you.
 
2012-08-22 02:29:10 PM

johnryan51: karnal: johnryan51

Why are we broke? Romney paid his 13%


His 13 percent is more than you will pay in a life time.

Oh he's rich so its ok. I'll just sit here and wait for the crumbs to fall from the 1% table. I'll pay my 30% because I won't make as much as him in my lifetime. No wonder the country is going to hell with nitwits like you.


Have we forgotten that Kerry paid an even lower tax rate than Romney when he had to release his tax returns during his run for the White House?

It's almost as if the obscenely wealthy have managed to rig the system so that they don't have to pay their fair share of taxes.
 
2012-08-22 02:33:50 PM

BullBearMS: johnryan51: karnal: johnryan51

Why are we broke? Romney paid his 13%


His 13 percent is more than you will pay in a life time.

Oh he's rich so its ok. I'll just sit here and wait for the crumbs to fall from the 1% table. I'll pay my 30% because I won't make as much as him in my lifetime. No wonder the country is going to hell with nitwits like you.

Have we forgotten that Kerry paid an even lower tax rate than Romney when he had to release his tax returns during his run for the White House?

It's almost as if the obscenely wealthy have managed to rig the system so that they don't have to pay their fair share of taxes.


Kerry should be paying also. C'Mon people equal treatmemt for all!
 
2012-08-22 02:39:00 PM

bartink: SquiggelyGrounders: Yep lets keep farking that chicken. So when we can no longer keep up this unsustainable system, we can have a soviet style collapse. Cant wait.

/Its better to put off responsibility for as long as possible.

What part is unsustainable?


The increase in the debt, especially under the Alternative Fiscal Baseline, which delaying these policies mimic.

Chart 9 in this report summarizes things very well (PDF warning)
 
2012-08-22 02:39:37 PM
That's the whole point. Only by having deadlines with catastrophic consequences will Congress be moved to action.
 
2012-08-22 02:44:23 PM

Stile4aly: You mean austerity measures are bad? But I was told we have a spending problem...


Both idelogies have their strong point and weak points. Continuing keynesian-type spending may help us out in the short-term but will likely have a large impact on our debt and future sustainability. Chopping our fingers to the bone and going with full blown austerity willl greatly impact us (especially the poor and middle-class) in the short term but will likely help the deficits and debts.

Likely the best solution is somewhere in the middle.
 
Displayed 50 of 96 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report