URL: http://community.realitytvworld.com/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/rtvw2/community/dcboard.cgi
Forum: DCForumID6
Thread Number: 37900
[ Go back to previous page ]

Original Message
"The fiscal cliff."

Posted by Estee on 12-20-12 at 10:30 AM
1. We're going over.

2. It'll be a mutual wrestle to the edge concluded with a simultaneous double push.

3. Geronimo!

In order to save America, it was necessary to destroy -- oh, shaddap.


Table of contents

Messages in this discussion
"I'm going hang gliding"
Posted by moonbaby on 12-20-12 at 11:31 AM
off the fiscal cliff. Might as well have fun with it!

"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by bondt007 on 12-20-12 at 12:06 PM
Well I had a few moments of hope but it's once again obvious to me O has no intention of working with anybody other then himself, and not much of an idea of what he is doing.

Canon ball !!!


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by Estee on 12-20-12 at 01:39 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-20-12 AT 01:40 PM (EST)

Let's be fair here: the GOP isn't particularly interested in compromise either. Did you see yesterday's press conference by the Speaker? If not, go ahead and watch it. It'll only take a minute. Or in this case, slightly less. They'll give the President anything he wants as long he promises to suicide at the end. Not being around to see people go back on their word is the most basic requirement for getting it.

But at this point? I don't think either party cares what happens as long as the population blames the other one for it. Two years of guaranteed financial/actual death in exchange for total control of Congress and two more to get everything? We're well past the place where the majority of politicians would sign off on that and use the blood from the fatalities for ink.

Now if America somehow happens to blame both sides...


"The fiscal cliff."
Posted by kidflash212 on 12-20-12 at 02:28 PM

"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by cahaya on 12-20-12 at 03:22 PM

"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by HobbsofMI on 12-20-12 at 02:46 PM
Don't it all end today...so why are we worried about January 1?


sig Syren, bouncy by IceCat, bobble head by Tribephyl, and snoglobe by agman


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by Max Headroom on 12-20-12 at 03:22 PM
It all reminds me of a kindergarten playground argument.

"It's his fault!"
"No, it's his fault!"
"Is not!"
"Is too!"


"Plan B"
Posted by cahaya on 12-20-12 at 04:05 PM
It speaks for itself...

Source: Non-partisan Tax Policy Center


"RE: Plan B"
Posted by HobbsofMI on 12-21-12 at 04:27 AM
GOP implodes and can't even get a vote on it.


sig Syren, bouncy by IceCat, bobble head by Tribephyl, and snoglobe by agman


"RE: Plan B"
Posted by Max Headroom on 12-21-12 at 08:28 AM
Gotta love the Tea Party. Raise taxes by $0.01 on billionaires? No way! *throws tantrum*

"RE: Plan B"
Posted by Estee on 12-21-12 at 10:14 AM
LAST EDITED ON 12-21-12 AT 10:14 AM (EST)

But nothing is their fault: it's everyone else who just doesn't see how reasonable and protective of the middle class they're being.

They will always escape blame from their backers because those who support them aren't capable of introspection. Or, in a lot of cases, spelling 'introspection'.


"RE: Plan B"
Posted by kingfish on 12-21-12 at 09:34 AM
They named themselves "Non-Partisan", did they.


"RE: Plan B"
Posted by cahaya on 12-21-12 at 10:42 AM
No, they haven't labeled themselves as being non-partisan, but various media outlets have. But then again, I would guess the media would label themselves as being non-partisan, too.

I think all they did was do the math.


"RE: Plan B"
Posted by kingfish on 12-21-12 at 11:08 AM
LAST EDITED ON 12-21-12 AT 11:10 AM (EST)

Who did then? Where did you get what you included in the fine print?


"RE: Plan B"
Posted by AyaK on 12-21-12 at 11:03 AM
LAST EDITED ON 12-21-12 AT 11:12 AM (EST)

Here's the link for the Plan B chart. As cahaya's number show, everything would basically stay the same except for people making over $1 million; the changes relate to deduction changes:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab.cfm?DocID=3749

And here's the chart for the Dem plan:

As you can see, under the Dem plan, the average increase in annual tax in the top 3 categories is:

$200K to $500K: $813
$500K to $1M: $13,212
Over $1M: $134,177

In looking at those numbers, you can see why the negotiations between Obama and Boehner had been headed toward a $500K limit on the rate hike (Obama had hinted that he'd live with $400K; Boehner had hinted that he'd take $600K, and it's obvious where that was headed); the extra money raised from the $250K threshold isn't that much. The problem was that, to get Republicans to move to accept ANY hike, Boehner also needed some tangible spending cuts, and Obama simply hasn't been willing to include any.

Realistically, Boehner needs Democratic votes to pass any compromise. He can't pass the compromise on Republican votes alone, because there are too many Republican reps who won't vote for any tax increase. He's well aware of that fact.


"RE: Plan B"
Posted by Estee on 12-21-12 at 11:51 AM
Let's just be glad there's nothing about disabilities in there or we'd never get a GOP majority vote.

Thankee for the numerical breakdown. At least now I've got a better picture on what they're actually arguing about.


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by Snidget on 12-20-12 at 06:06 PM
They are waiting to see what Santa puts in their stockings before doing any serious negotiating.

Although what waking up to a living room filled to the brim with coal will mean may vary by which party they belong to.


Deck the Halls with Sigs of Tribe

I actually got a lump of coal one year in a mini stocking as a gift.


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by kingfish on 12-21-12 at 09:40 AM
Time for Plan C. We still have a lot of alphabet left.

But it still won't be good enough for Obama, and when he dumps on it he'll still manage to spin it as the Republican's fault that he rejected it and say they should should put partisan politics aside.

It takes two to make a compromise, and only one to prevent it.

Obama. The preventer.


"Plan C"
Posted by cahaya on 12-28-12 at 01:38 PM
"C" for "Cliff".

At least someone is doing the math.


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by bondt007 on 12-23-12 at 03:59 PM

"...Mr. Obama repeatedly lost patience with the speaker as negotiations faltered. In an Oval Office meeting last week, he told Mr. Boehner that if the sides didn't reach agreement, he would use his inaugural address and his State of the Union speech to tell the country the Republicans were at fault.
At one point, according to notes taken by a participant, Mr. Boehner told the president, "I put $800 billion on the table. What do I get for that?"
"You get nothing," the president said. "I get that for free."


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324731304578193770576333616.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


"Leading the lemmings."
Posted by Estee on 12-28-12 at 12:25 PM
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/eric-bolling-encourages-swan-dive-off-fiscal-cliff-it-should-be-called-the-obama-cliff/

Again: it's not about who gets hurt, it's who gets blamed for the injuries. And I'm guessing most Faux News personalities can afford $6.00 per gallon for milk.

Meanwhile, Hannity is basically saying the GOP should not work with the President because in his opinion, the White House has mocked them. Well, if that's the new standard, then no Democrat has any obligation to work with a Republican ever again due to Hannity's mocking of the left. Fair's fair, right?

...we did put an age restriction on running for the actualy offices, right? Because right now, the first graders are running the show. And they aren't toilet trained.


"Last hours before the fall."
Posted by Estee on 12-31-12 at 11:19 AM
So as I understand the current logic, any liberal who suffers from the upcoming collapse deserves it and any conservative will just understand this is the price for making the liberals pay and they'll bear the pain gladly.

Or on the underlying level, 'We're rich. None of the price increases will bother us in the least.'

Rupert Murdoch's and Rush Limbaugh's finest hour approaches. Let the natural end to ultra-partisan politics begin.

Hey, Tea Party! You won!


"So..."
Posted by moonbaby on 12-31-12 at 02:28 PM
this year the ball will drop from the fiscal cliff?


"Nope."
Posted by Estee on 12-31-12 at 02:54 PM
This Congress dropped the ball a long time ago.

Turns out the terrorists were homegrown.


"RE: Nope."
Posted by moonbaby on 12-31-12 at 02:59 PM
You are correct!

And? These terrorists went to the very best of schools.


"Wile E. Coyote"
Posted by moonbaby on 12-31-12 at 04:02 PM
paddles the air while the Roadrunner moves an Acme trampoline to just the right spot at the bottom to break the coyote's fall, and it propels him upward again only to see him fall again and then shoot upward again and then fall again...

"Stocks going up"
Posted by Snidget on 12-31-12 at 06:23 PM
So half the rich people and banks figure we are going over the cliff and that means they will be able to screw over screw over the middle class and poor more than ever before.

and

The other half of the rich people and banks think the last minute deal will happen and that means they will be able to screw over the middle class and poor more than ever before.

Did I miss anything?


"RE: Stocks going up"
Posted by dabo on 12-31-12 at 09:12 PM
LAST EDITED ON 12-31-12 AT 09:14 PM (EST)

No matter how much Congress tries to ignor it, the odometer is about to turn.

Because in the end the people who were unwilling to vote on anything instead voted for everything that results from their unwillingness to get anything done.


"Deadline passed."
Posted by Estee on 01-01-13 at 10:04 AM
While an agreement in principle was supposedly reached, it wasn't voted on and since the day off is more important than cleaning up the mess from a day off, no one's going to touch this until at least tomorrow.

I now expect some Tea Party stalwart to try and filibuster the economy.


"RE: Deadline passed."
Posted by Max Headroom on 01-01-13 at 10:33 AM
We'll see how the Senate deal fares in the House. That's the big question.

"RE: Deadline passed."
Posted by Estee on 01-01-13 at 11:37 AM
Put it this way: we are about to play a game called Find The Revolutionaries-In-Waiting. Everybody loses.

It's possible the GOP could get enough of a grip on its own membership to get this thing through -- but the Toilet Papers are unlikely to cooperate. The question would then become 'How much TP does it take to coat the country with bowel movement product?' And the answer? Just enough.

Let's see who really believes in the 'We will own the rubble!' (false) equation.


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by dabo on 01-01-13 at 05:17 PM
LAST EDITED ON 01-01-13 AT 05:18 PM (EST)

What the Senate Bill does and why the Tea Party will kill it:

Extends Bush-era tax breaks on incomes up to $400,000 for individuals, $450,000 for couples. Earnings above those amounts would be taxed at a rate of 39.6%, up from the current 35%. Extends Clinton-era caps on itemized deductions and the phase-out of the personal exemption for individuals making more than $250,000 and couples earning more than $300,000.
(It's a tax raise!)

Estates would be taxed at a top rate of 40%, with the first $5 million in value exempted for individual estates and $10 million for family estates. In 2012, such estates were subject to a top rate of 35%.
(It's a death tax raise!)

Taxes on capital gains and dividend income exceeding $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for families would increase from 15% to 20%.
(Hurts mythological job creators and job creation!)

Permanently addresses the alternative minimum tax and indexes it for inflation to prevent nearly 30 million middle- and upper-middle income taxpayers from being hit with higher tax bills averaging almost $3,000.
(Are they trying to put tax accountants out of business? In this economy?)

Extends for five years Obama-sought expansions of the child tax credit, earned income tax credit, and an up to $2,500 tax credit for college tuition.
(Loopholes!)

Extends jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed for one year.
(Nanny state!)

Blocks a 27% cut in Medicare payments to doctors for one year. The cut is the product of an obsolete 1997 budget formula.
(Well, and it was flawed from the outset anyway, though an effort at fiscal responsibility, which just goes to prove there is no such animal as fiscally responsible gubment, at least not Democratic ones.)

Allows a 2-percentage point cut in the payroll tax first enacted two years ago to lapse, which restores the payroll tax to 6.2%.
(Hurts small business!)

Delays for two months $109 billion worth of across-the-board spending cuts set to start striking the Pentagon and domestic agencies this week. Cost of $24 billion is divided between spending cuts and new revenues from rules changes on converting traditional individual retirement accounts into Roth IRAs.
(Not enough spending cuts!)


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by Max Headroom on 01-01-13 at 05:52 PM
Cost of $24 billion is divided between spending cuts and new revenues

So much for cutting that deficit; let's raise taxes and then whittle a little bit out of the extra revenue and call it "savings". That's why this won't get passed as written.


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by Round Robin on 01-01-13 at 09:45 PM
The House lost their balls. They wimped out from amending in some spending cuts because they didn't have the votes, and now they're gonna vote up or down on the Senate bill. If the Senate bill is as bad as I hear it is, why don't they just grow a set and vote the damn thing down? But it seems as if they don't have the jewelry to do so.

"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by dabo on 01-01-13 at 10:18 PM
Thank goodness we're getting a new Congress in a couple of days, I'm more than fed up with this one.

At this point in the impending House vote I think the point may be how many TeePe-ers call in sick with the one-hour (can't) stomach (this) flu.


"RE: The fiscal cliff."
Posted by kingfish on 01-03-13 at 11:31 AM
New?

Well, the congressional number did increment. And there are some new faces.

But it's gonna be the same ole BS.


"House vote"
Posted by dabo on 01-02-13 at 00:00 AM
No changes, passes the House, many Pubs still voted no.

"The net result to the taxpayer's paycheck..."
Posted by cahaya on 01-03-13 at 11:19 AM

Ouch.


"RE: The net result to the taxpayer's paycheck..."
Posted by jbug on 01-03-13 at 02:26 PM
and our health insurance premiums went up about 4% - so with the deduction for my share of that (which was zero when I was hired but is 25% now)
let's see...... that will be about how much less in my take home each week?

And? the company started a company match up to 3% for our IRA retirement plans this year; so of course I'm having that 3% taken out every week. It's a good thing, but it still means less take home.


"Interesting"
Posted by jbug on 01-03-13 at 05:02 PM
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/senators-got-154-page-fiscal-cliff-bill-3-minutes-voting-it

Reading these things gives me a headache.
Maybe that's why Congress doesn't bother to read them either.
http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/fiscalcliff/BILLS-112hr8eas.pdf


"RE: Interesting"
Posted by HobbsofMI on 01-03-13 at 07:59 PM
I thought they were all speed readers and it was one of the qualifications for the job thus whey I never applied. I can barley write in English.


sig Syren, bouncy by IceCat, bobble head by Tribephyl, and snoglobe by agman


"RE: Interesting"
Posted by bondt007 on 01-04-13 at 03:34 AM
I remember there was a huge complaint about them not reading Obamacare too, and still voting (so the Nancey wouldn't miss her flight!)



>Issued by "Q" and RollDdice


"RE: Interesting"
Posted by HobbsofMI on 01-04-13 at 01:42 PM
Well they had over 500 days to come up with something and leave them time to read it.


sig Syren, bouncy by IceCat, bobble head by Tribephyl, and snoglobe by agman


"Tea Party threatens "consequences"."
Posted by Estee on 01-04-13 at 01:10 PM
...so up until now, we've been getting their cooperative and helpful side?

I especially enjoyed the one who said he wanted to reach out across the aisle -- and strangle people.


"RE: Tea Party threatens "consequences"."
Posted by cahaya on 01-04-13 at 01:43 PM
Well, it's truth or consequences, and we sure won't be getting the truth from them.