Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(FactCheck)   Factcheck: as usual, the Republicans are spewing bullshiat, lies and nonsense on the fiscal cliff, but thankfully we have an opposing Democratic viewpoint spewing nonsense, lies and bullshiat   (factcheck.org ) divider line
    More: Obvious, Republican, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, United States budget process, Maya MacGuineas, GOP leaders, debt service coverage ratio, out-of-pocket expenses, Budget Control Act  
•       •       •

1945 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Dec 2012 at 1:00 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-07 01:12:34 PM  
so vote republican?
 
2012-12-07 01:12:59 PM  
BSABSVR'd in the boobies
 
2012-12-07 01:14:47 PM  
It seems like it'd be quite easy to just ask Republicans;
Outline the exact loopholes to close that would be directly, monetarily equivalent to the x% tax increase on the rich.
 
2012-12-07 01:15:25 PM  
I thought that increased means testing for Medicare was a Republican idea?
 
2012-12-07 01:18:57 PM  
Geithner exaggerates when he says the ratio of spending cuts to tax increases is "roughly 2 to 1." The administration's $3 trillion in "spending cuts" includes more than $800 billion on two wars financed by deficit spending and already set to end, and tens of billions in new or higher fees and surcharges described as "reforms."

What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures? So what if their spending cuts are already planned. The goal is for us to get closer to balanced budgets, and the US HAD balanced budgets, or close, just before the wars started. Why wouldn't we include them?
 
2012-12-07 01:21:59 PM  

BarrRepublican: BSABSVR'd in the boobies

 
2012-12-07 01:22:35 PM  
And on that note, we're including tax revenue gains that will be realized if we go back to the income tax rates we had before the wars.... should the politicians not count those as negotiated concessions either?
 
2012-12-07 01:23:29 PM  

oldass31: Geithner exaggerates when he says the ratio of spending cuts to tax increases is "roughly 2 to 1." The administration's $3 trillion in "spending cuts" includes more than $800 billion on two wars financed by deficit spending and already set to end, and tens of billions in new or higher fees and surcharges described as "reforms."

What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures? So what if their spending cuts are already planned. The goal is for us to get closer to balanced budgets, and the US HAD balanced budgets, or close, just before the wars started. Why wouldn't we include them?


Factcheck has to even lies from both sides or they get screamed at for bias. That's it.
 
2012-12-07 01:23:33 PM  

oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?


When talking about the impact of proposed changes, including changes that occur regardless of the proposal in the valuation of said proposal is disingenuous.

That said, normally the people who argue that line are full of shiat and weaseling words, so oftentimes the above doesn't apply.
 
2012-12-07 01:24:00 PM  
So, Geither's great sin is not giving point by point analysis of the President's plan on the Sunday shows and coming off as a bit vague on some subjects as a result.

Boehner is just lying his ass off.

But both sides are bad.
 
2012-12-07 01:24:36 PM  
Wow, I screwed that post all the way up. I'm going to lunch.
 
2012-12-07 01:28:50 PM  

oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?


The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work
 
2012-12-07 01:30:08 PM  

sprawl15: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

When talking about the impact of proposed changes, including changes that occur regardless of the proposal in the valuation of said proposal is disingenuous.

That said, normally the people who argue that line are full of shiat and weaseling words, so oftentimes the above doesn't apply.


I see your point. But I also see the spending cuts from the inevitable winding down of the Afghanistan/Iraq Wars and compare it in the same light as the increased revenue from the inevitable expiration of the Bush/Obama Tax Cuts.

I say either we count both when calculating the "spending cuts to tax revenue" ratio, or we count neither. Personally, I would like to SEE how the "ratio" negotiations would go if neither were counted.
 
2012-12-07 01:30:22 PM  

Stile4aly: So, Geither's great sin is not giving point by point analysis of the President's plan on the Sunday shows and coming off as a bit vague on some subjects as a result.

Boehner is just lying his ass off.

But both sides are bad.

 
2012-12-07 01:31:18 PM  

sprawl15: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

When talking about the impact of proposed changes, including changes that occur regardless of the proposal in the valuation of said proposal is disingenuous.

That said, normally the people who argue that line are full of shiat and weaseling words, so oftentimes the above doesn't apply.


Is that like having temporary tax cuts that end up being more or less permanent as the GOP fights to have them retained in full?
 
2012-12-07 01:31:57 PM  

BarrRepublican: BSABSVR'd in the boobies


the setup was too easy. almost feel guilty.
 
2012-12-07 01:32:44 PM  

tomcatadam: It seems like it'd be quite easy to just ask Republicans;
Outline the exact loopholes to close that would be directly, monetarily equivalent to the x% tax increase on the rich.


They'll get you a full report right after they tell you exactly what Obama was lying about regarding Benghazi.
 
2012-12-07 01:35:17 PM  

Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work


Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?
 
2012-12-07 01:35:29 PM  
Did we really have so few problems as a nation that the debt limit and the fiscal cliff had to be created?
 
2012-12-07 01:36:04 PM  
So.... politicians lie?
 
2012-12-07 01:37:41 PM  
And just who expected anything different?
 
2012-12-07 01:38:01 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work

Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?


Maybe you should wikipedia austerity before you try to make points like this, because tax increases aren't austerity.
 
2012-12-07 01:38:19 PM  
i512.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-07 01:39:54 PM  

Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work


I think Austerity fiscal policies CAN work if done at the right time, the right way, under only the right circumstances. Take a look at the Clinton Years. The later years were kinda sorta like austerity years and it made sense to do it at that time. Running deficits during Good economic times is, for the most part, Bad fiscal policy. If we had kept that system going during the Bush years all the way leading up to the housing crash, I think we'd be in a much more stable position right now. That's why I think this country should stick to a counter-cyclical fiscal policy.
 
2012-12-07 01:40:13 PM  

oldass31: But I also see the spending cuts from the inevitable winding down of the Afghanistan/Iraq Wars and compare it in the same light as the increased revenue from the inevitable expiration of the Bush/Obama Tax Cuts.


Well, yes and no. The tax cuts are set to expire, but the debate is if we will and if so how much will we allow to expire. In comparison, there isn't a debate over if we should remain out of Iraq or if we should put another half million troops in next month. Obama's proposing a certain amount of the tax cuts to be retained, the GOP isn't. That's a delta, and relevant to comparisons between the plans. Neither are really proposing significant differences in Afghanistan/Iraq, so it's directly irrelevant.

But it's more a distinction that requires a clear question - is the question how much Obama has reduced/raised spending in his term? Or is it a question of how much Obama is proposing to reduce/raise spending within a specific proposal?
 
2012-12-07 01:41:27 PM  
Why shouldn't Democrats feed Republican voters bullshiat? They've proven time and time again that they're happy to eat it. No reason the GOP should have a monopoly on manipulating morons.
 
2012-12-07 01:41:30 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work

Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?


Tax increases ≠ Austerity measures.

In economics, austerity is a policy of reducing benefits and public services provided in order to reduce deficits.  Austerity has nothing to do with tax rates.
 
2012-12-07 01:43:02 PM  

oldass31: Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work

I think Austerity fiscal policies CAN work if done at the right time, the right way, under only the right circumstances. Take a look at the Clinton Years. The later years were kinda sorta like austerity years and it made sense to do it at that time. Running deficits during Good economic times is, for the most part, Bad fiscal policy. If we had kept that system going during the Bush years all the way leading up to the housing crash, I think we'd be in a much more stable position right now. That's why I think this country should stick to a counter-cyclical fiscal policy.


Let me be clear, I mean that continuing the surpluses during the first 6 years of the Bush Administration would've been a very good thing.
 
2012-12-07 01:50:07 PM  

CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work

Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?

Maybe you should wikipedia austerity before you try to make points like this, because tax increases aren't austerity.


Of course they are. Money is taken out of the economy to reduce deficits. If you take $100 more from a million people its not different from giving $100 less to a million people. Maybe you shouldn't trust wikipedia so blindly.

Ezra Klein, no conservative, attaches the "austerity" monicker to the fiscal cliff. Tax hikes have been a significant part of European austerity measures, with VAT hikes going on all over the place and income taxes hiked as well.
 
2012-12-07 01:54:34 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work

Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?

Maybe you should wikipedia austerity before you try to make points like this, because tax increases aren't austerity.

Of course they are. Money is taken out of the economy to reduce deficits. If you take $100 more from a million people its not different from giving $100 less to a million people. Maybe you shouldn't trust wikipedia so blindly.

Ezra Klein, no conservative, attaches the "austerity" monicker to the fiscal cliff. Tax hikes have been a significant part of European austerity measures, with VAT hikes going on all over the place and income taxes hiked as well.


Austerity is specifically lowering the amount spent on government programs and services. It is often paired with tax hikes because they ostensibly accomplish the same end goal (government has more money) but they are not the same thing. I'm not even going to bother looking up what Ezra Klein said because Ezra Klein is not an economist he's a bobble head on MSNBC.
 
2012-12-07 01:57:07 PM  

JesusJuice: Why shouldn't Democrats feed Republican voters bullshiat? They've proven time and time again that they're happy to eat it. No reason the GOP should have a monopoly on manipulating morons.


For the same reasons Republicans should not feed bullshiat to Republican voters. It inherently implies a lack of faith in one's fellow man, which is irreconcilable with the highest qualities of a Leader; Leaders that the American people deserve.
 
2012-12-07 01:57:12 PM  
Interesting read.
 
2012-12-07 02:02:20 PM  

macadamnut: [i512.photobucket.com image 500x334]


I would say take away the Elephant mask from the donkey and you've got your 2016 election.
 
2012-12-07 02:07:03 PM  

oldass31: Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work

I think Austerity fiscal policies CAN work if done at the right time, the right way, under only the right circumstances. Take a look at the Clinton Years. The later years were kinda sorta like austerity years and it made sense to do it at that time. Running deficits during Good economic times is, for the most part, Bad fiscal policy. If we had kept that system going during the Bush years all the way leading up to the housing crash, I think we'd be in a much more stable position right now. That's why I think this country should stick to a counter-cyclical fiscal policy.


When you're trying to go in a straight line - if a force pushes you to the left, you steer to the right. If a force pushes you tot he right, you steer to the left.

When the wind lifts you up, you angle down. When the wind pushes you down, you angle up.

Stern in the good times to provide for the bad.

HOW THE HELL IS IT HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THIS >:|
 
2012-12-07 02:07:50 PM  

CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: Muta: oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures?

The spending cuts have to be were they won't risk hurting the economy. The cuts from the winding down of the two wars reduce spending (yeah) and don't take money out of the economy (yeah!).

It's Official: Austerity Economics Doesn't Work

Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?

Maybe you should wikipedia austerity before you try to make points like this, because tax increases aren't austerity.

Of course they are. Money is taken out of the economy to reduce deficits. If you take $100 more from a million people its not different from giving $100 less to a million people. Maybe you shouldn't trust wikipedia so blindly.

Ezra Klein, no conservative, attaches the "austerity" monicker to the fiscal cliff. Tax hikes have been a significant part of European austerity measures, with VAT hikes going on all over the place and income taxes hiked as well.

Austerity is specifically lowering the amount spent on government programs and services. It is often paired with tax hikes because they ostensibly accomplish the same end goal (government has more money) but they are not the same thing. I'm not even going to bother looking up what Ezra Klein said because Ezra Klein is not an economist he's a bobble head on MSNBC.


The term 'austerity' is routinely used to describe governmental policies seeking to reduce fiscal imbalances by either spending decreases or tax increases. European austerity measures have included tax hikes.

Austria's austerity plan includes an expected income of €1.17 billion ($1.63 billion) from tax increases--a banking tax that will bring in €500 million in 2011, extra taxes on tobacco, petrol, and flight tickets that will bring in approximately €667 million in 2011

The Irish government Wednesday announced 3.5 billion euros (4.5 billion dollars) in tax hikes and cuts in its latest austerity budget

Czech Republic - Austerity package to include tax increases

Greek Parliament shortly after midnight on Nov. 12 easily approved an austerity-packed budget for 2013 that includes big pay cuts, tax hikes and slashed pensions

These are all from the first couple pages of an internet search.
 
2012-12-07 02:14:38 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: The term 'austerity' is routinely used to describe governmental policies seeking to reduce fiscal imbalances by either spending decreases or tax increases. European austerity measures have included tax hikes.

Austria's austerity plan includes an expected income of €1.17 billion ($1.63 billion) from tax increases--a banking tax that will bring in €500 million in 2011, extra taxes on tobacco, petrol, and flight tickets that will bring in approximately €667 million in 2011

The Irish government Wednesday announced 3.5 billion euros (4.5 billion dollars) in tax hikes and cuts in its latest austerity budget

Czech Republic - Austerity package to include tax increases

Greek Parliament shortly after midnight on Nov. 12 easily approved an austerity-packed budget for 2013 that includes big pay cuts, tax hikes and slashed pensions

These are all from the first couple pages of an internet search.


If you're submitting plans with massive cuts to social services as an austerity plan and then throwing in some tax increases with them that doesn't make tax increases austerity. Find me something refering to a tax increase as an austerity plan and you'll have a point.
 
2012-12-07 02:22:57 PM  

CPennypacker: Debeo Summa Credo: The term 'austerity' is routinely used to describe governmental policies seeking to reduce fiscal imbalances by either spending decreases or tax increases. European austerity measures have included tax hikes.

Austria's austerity plan includes an expected income of €1.17 billion ($1.63 billion) from tax increases--a banking tax that will bring in €500 million in 2011, extra taxes on tobacco, petrol, and flight tickets that will bring in approximately €667 million in 2011

The Irish government Wednesday announced 3.5 billion euros (4.5 billion dollars) in tax hikes and cuts in its latest austerity budget

Czech Republic - Austerity package to include tax increases

Greek Parliament shortly after midnight on Nov. 12 easily approved an austerity-packed budget for 2013 that includes big pay cuts, tax hikes and slashed pensions

These are all from the first couple pages of an internet search.

If you're submitting plans with massive cuts to social services as an austerity plan and then throwing in some tax increases with them that doesn't make tax increases austerity. Find me something refering to a tax increase as an austerity plan and you'll have a point.


Every one of those refers to tax increases as austerity plans. Never mind, this is a useless conversation we are having, even for fark.
 
2012-12-07 02:23:47 PM  

Summercat: Stern in the good times to provide for the bad. HOW THE HELL IS IT HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THIS >:|


Part of the problem is that this starts to sound like centralized economic planning at the government level. Rightly or wrongly this gives a fair amount of people some serious jitters.
 
2012-12-07 02:39:00 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Every one of those refers to tax increases as austerity plans. Never mind, this is a useless conversation we are having, even for fark.


For real?

Debeo Summa Credo: Austria's austerity plan includes an expected income of €1.17 billion ($1.63 billion) from tax increases--a banking tax that will bring in €500 million in 2011, extra taxes on tobacco, petrol, and flight tickets that will bring in approximately €667 million in 2011

The Irish government Wednesday announced 3.5 billion euros (4.5 billion dollars) in tax hikes and cuts in its latest austerity budget

Czech Republic - Austerity package to include tax increases

Greek Parliament shortly after midnight on Nov. 12 easily approved an austerity-packed budget for 2013 that includes big pay cuts, tax hikes and slashed pensions


Not the same thing. None of those are "we passed a tax increase because Austerity," and its relevant because your initial point was attempting to point out cognitive dissonance that wouldn't exist because Austerity and tax increases are not the same thing.
 
2012-12-07 02:44:17 PM  
The use of the term austerity shouldn't be the primary debate. Let's just assume the position that contractionary policy in a weak economy is a bad thing. That include tax increases and spending cuts.

The fact is we probably should have a more expansionary fiscal policy for at least another year based on IMF/Fed/every other group's predictions of continued weak growth unless anything is done. But we're not having that conversation; our government has prioritized shrinking the deficit, and if we're going to do that it should be in a way that is least harmful. What is the least harmful sacrifices is a legitimate argument to have. The problem is that Republicans are trying to claim that it is more harmful to raise marginal tax rates or cut defense spending by a dime than any discretionary or non-elderly entitlement spending, and most will argue that cutting spending on the poor will stimulate the economy by making more people have to go find jobs despite the metrics showing excess capacity and low demand are what is extending this downturn.
 
2012-12-07 02:49:08 PM  

tomcatadam: It seems like it'd be quite easy to just ask Republicans;
Outline the exact loopholes to close that would be directly, monetarily equivalent to the x% tax increase on the rich.


Then have them explain how the rich paying that x% value through reduced deductions is different then them paying it through a marginal tax rate increase.
 
2012-12-07 02:54:00 PM  

Somacandra: Summercat: Stern in the good times to provide for the bad. HOW THE HELL IS IT HARD FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THIS >:|

Part of the problem is that this starts to sound like centralized economic planning at the government level. Rightly or wrongly this gives a fair amount of people some serious jitters.


You have to, to a point - especially when everything is so goddamn interconnected that a hiccup in one company can cause dozens or hundreds of other companies to hiccup. Then the hiccups ripple across unrelated industries.

You can make the argument that protecting people from the impacts of other people's bad mistakes is a good use of government.
 
2012-12-07 02:59:37 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?


I am against the tax increases to those making less than $250,000 since they have the greater marginal propensity to consume. Tax increases on this group would not grow the economy.
 
2012-12-07 03:00:50 PM  
Boehner's got projection down at least.

Are we sure he didn't work in movie theaters growing up?
 
2012-12-07 03:04:34 PM  

Muta: Debeo Summa Credo: Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?

I am against the tax increases to those making less than $250,000 since they have the greater marginal propensity to consume. Tax increases on this group would not grow the economy.


Look, man, you're trying to convince someone who has no use for facts by using reasoning.

It won't work.
 
2012-12-07 03:16:14 PM  

Muta: Debeo Summa Credo: Austerity doesn't work? So I assume you are against tax increases, right?

I am against the tax increases to those making less than $250,000 since they have the greater marginal propensity to consume. Tax increases on this group would not grow the economy.


And really, the only reason tax increases are being talked about is because the right has decided that the debt needs to be addressed right now even though most of the methods that lower the debt will be bad for our recovery.
 
2012-12-07 03:16:30 PM  

oldass31: What's wrong with including spending cuts from ending the wars in these trillion dollar figures? So what if their spending cuts are already planned. The goal is for us to get closer to balanced budgets, and the US HAD balanced budgets, or close, just before the wars started. Why wouldn't we include them?


And also consider that those war deficits were conveniently blamed on Obama for the past four years. I'm okay with him claiming those as a savings.
 
2012-12-07 03:21:55 PM  

tomcatadam: It seems like it'd be quite easy to just ask Republicans;
Outline the exact loopholes to close that would be directly, monetarily equivalent to the x% tax increase on the rich.


At the end of this kerfuffle, Boehner is going to settle on offering a cap on deductions at 50k, and Obama will take it.
 
2012-12-07 03:23:58 PM  

odinsposse: And really, the only reason tax increases are being talked about is because the right has decided that the debt needs to be addressed right now even though most of the methods that lower the debt will be bad for our recovery


No it is being talked about because Obama spent the past year saying that he wants to raise taxes on the top two brackets. If it was up to the repubs they would keep the tax rates the same as today.
 
2012-12-07 03:27:23 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Every one of those refers to tax increases as austerity plans.


Huh, I don't think I've ever met an adult before that didn't know what "includes" meant. Do you get confused when you go to McDonalds and the menu doesn't refer to a combo meal as "potatoes"? After all, it says right on the menu that it "includes fries" so that obviously means that "combo meal" = "potatoes", right?
 
Displayed 50 of 68 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 »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report