HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Howard Dean says he would...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:19 PM

Howard Dean says he would prefer we went off the "fiscal cliff"...

He said it was more of a slope than a cliff but this is probably the only chance we will get to cut the defense budget, he said. Also, if we did not raise taxes now, we will be making more cuts later and those cuts will be on those least able to afford them. All in all, he said he would prefer the "fiscal cliff" to compromising away too much.

Governor Dean has earned our respect and deserves a listen.

He was just on Lawrence O'Donnell's show.

43 replies, 3444 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 43 replies Author Time Post
Reply Howard Dean says he would prefer we went off the "fiscal cliff"... (Original post)
kentuck Dec 2012 OP
Cleita Dec 2012 #1
bluestateguy Dec 2012 #2
kentuck Dec 2012 #4
bluestateguy Dec 2012 #7
kentuck Dec 2012 #9
TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #25
xtraxritical Dec 2012 #29
ellisonz Dec 2012 #35
Horse with no Name Dec 2012 #10
JI7 Dec 2012 #11
jtuck004 Dec 2012 #21
Warpy Dec 2012 #14
_ed_ Dec 2012 #41
DJ13 Dec 2012 #12
TheProgressive Dec 2012 #13
kentuck Dec 2012 #40
6spokewheels Dec 2012 #32
Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #3
MrSlayer Dec 2012 #5
muriel_volestrangler Dec 2012 #39
TheProgressive Dec 2012 #6
backscatter712 Dec 2012 #8
Kolesar Dec 2012 #15
Baitball Blogger Dec 2012 #16
chazunit Dec 2012 #17
hrmjustin Dec 2012 #18
jsr Dec 2012 #19
shanti Dec 2012 #20
Volaris Dec 2012 #22
ProSense Dec 2012 #23
liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #24
fadedrose Dec 2012 #26
Kurovski Dec 2012 #37
andym Dec 2012 #27
amandabeech Dec 2012 #28
iemitsu Dec 2012 #30
rudycantfail Dec 2012 #31
patrice Dec 2012 #33
kentuck Dec 2012 #34
Selatius Dec 2012 #38
ellisonz Dec 2012 #36
flamingdem Dec 2012 #42
99Forever Dec 2012 #43

Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:21 PM

1. Yep and he's right. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:23 PM

2. He seemed to say that the middle class SHOULD have to pay higher taxes

As in, not just going over the cliff as a political tactic, but he seems to think that everybody's taxes just need to go up.

I cannot support that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:26 PM

4. $250K is not middle class.

No matter where you live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #4)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:28 PM

7. And I agree, but that is not what Dean was saying

He said that everybody will have to pay more because tax increases on the wealthy would not be enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:31 PM

9. And he is right.

Employers have used these tax cuts as substitutes for wage increases and it would pinch a lot of people. I don't know what the bottom would be that would be affected?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:37 AM

25. I think it is very close to right.

Those that are in the bottom bracket that actually pay taxes get killed and it was regressive as hell then too. The trick is nobody cares if those people are fucked.

Then there is the issue of the top bracket being stupid. The rate is fine for those at the 250k to maybe 400k or so and bump another three percent up to 750k to 1.2 from there to 1.6 another two points up two percent at 2.2. to 3 million up two and on to a top marginal rate of...I want to try between 58 and 62 percent on a graduated basis.

Of course if you have that you might be able to afford and the math may allow for reductions on the where we live areas too.

I'm ready for mine to go up and I'm nowhere near a high roller, I tire of the whining. Lot of folks don't want to pay their taxes. Being a Democrat is morphing into the willingness to tax the wealthy a bit more than themselves and liberal means willing to tax the wealthy noticeably more.

The wringing the hands for the working poor of Manhattan and San Francisco at risk of an additional few percent on what they make over a quarter million a year is bordering on putrid. Especially when anything dumped on the real working poor trying to make it on 15 and 20 grand get way less empathy no matter what is dumped on them.

Those of us just over broke, well no sympathy ever unless combined into the "middle class" aka 80%+ or so the country that includes most of the top twenty. Again, I don't much mind and am willing to do my piece to restore sanity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheKentuckian (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:56 AM

29. So we all go back to Clinton era tax rates, big deal. Plus we cut the military, hooray!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:57 AM

35. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:43 PM

10. he said the tax rates need to go back to the Clinton tax rates for everyone. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:03 PM

11. i think that's consistent with his position in 2004 i don't agree with that

but i do think it's preferable to keeping tax cuts for the wealthy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:10 AM

21. Only because we are sending $40 billion a month to billionaires instead of


investing it in the people with jobs and training to boost demand. Doing the greedy bastards bidding, still.

Ironic how we have enough to do that, and give zero interest loans to banks, while we have a record 47 million on food stamps and 50,000 families a month being removed from their homes in foreclosure.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #4)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:18 PM

14. Actually, it is, it's upper middle class in most parts of the country

but people who make that and insist on living in Manhattan or one of the tonier parts of San Francisco might feel a bit strapped on it, the kiddies going to a state school before transferring to one of the Ivies for their senior year.

However, even they can afford to pay an additional 3% in taxes on all money above that $250,000/year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:45 AM

41. Amen

My wife and I bring in considerably less than half of that and I think we're well-off, even wealthy. 250K a year means you're rich. Bottom line. I don't give a shit if you live in Manhattan. 250K is a ton of money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:04 PM

12. Stop the FICA tax "holiday" is one place to raise taxes

That tax cut isnt enough of a cut in a paycheck to hurt anyone, and it puts SS in better shape.

Besides, that was a poor replacement for the prior "making work pay" tax credit, as that was better targeted towards the lower income groups who spend it (thus actually stimulating the economy).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DJ13 (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:14 PM

13. Totally agree...

If they want to give a tax break to the middleclass - all they had to do was to adjust the rate tables. And
not mess with FICA and Social Security.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DJ13 (Reply #12)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:26 AM

40. It was a silly idea...

to begin with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:15 AM

32. we cannot sustain even the mid-class cuts

 

What kind of Bizzarro World were we in, to allow tax-cuts during a time of war, anyway. That's fucking insane...which means WE'RE fucking insane.

Dr. Dean is absolutely correct!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:24 PM

3. I'm thinking this may be best. You can't let the GOP blackmail us, or there will be no end to it.

The blackmail will keep coming up during the next 4 years.

But sheesh, it will be painful for many.

Hopefully, the Congress can quickly pass tax cuts for the middle class early next year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:27 PM

5. This has been my position all along.

 

The talk of the top rate increase is bullshit really. We don't win a damn thing that way. It's giving the Republicans 99% of what they want. The Romneys and Adelsons of the world don't pay income taxes so this won't do a fucking thing to them. Go over the cliff, let ALL the Clinton rates come back. Capital gains go back to 20% and the corporate minimum of 16% comes back too. No more billion dollar tax rebates to GE and Exxon. Do NOT give those back. Install a per trade tax on every Wall Street transaction. Cut defense spending. Make them beg and crawl for once.

Cutting a deal now gives away all our leverage. If they're going to do it, ask for a lot more than a mere 2% increase in the top rate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrSlayer (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 07:19 AM

39. Obama's proposal does include capital gains going back to 20%, for those above $250k

That Senate-passed bill which Obama wants the House to pass would do the following for one year, 2013:

Extend income tax rates enacted in 2001 for individual taxpayers making less than $200,000, for heads of households making less than $225,000 and for married couples filing a joint tax return who make less than $250,000 a year.
Raise the top income tax rates on taxpayers above those thresholds to 36 percent and 39.6 percent.
Increase the tax rate from 15 percent to 20 percent on dividend income and capital gains income for taxpayers whose income exceeds the threshold amounts above.
...
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/03/15647710-income-tax-rates-just-one-piece-of-obama-proposal?lite

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:28 PM

6. It might be the momentum, the push, needed to do real budget adjustments.

For one, we need to tax the wealthy more. Sorry, but they have the money and have benefited
from living in our great United States. Now it is time to give back. We have a $16T debt and
our country is falling apart. We need their tax money.

And, we have to cut the War Dept budget. Although our world has some 'hot spots' - it isn't like
we are always on the brink of WWIII. We have to make life habitable and safe here in America, too,
before we can 'protect' the world (which they did not ask us to do).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 10:30 PM

8. So would I.

It would be worth it just to show the GOP we'll no longer negotiate with terrorists - next time they take hostages, we shoot the hostage.

So I'm a little cold-blooded with my tactics. I like winning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:38 PM

15. The Pentagon budget would still be way bigger than it was when bush took over

They can handle it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:59 PM

16. Well, I'm just glad that we have this leverage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:00 AM

17. not a "cliff"

 

but just another bump in the road. Don't allow MSM tell you that it is anything other than that.

The truth is that it allows for those of us to adjust things afterwards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chazunit (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:04 AM

18. Welcome to DU!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:05 AM

19. Kill the Bush tax cuts

Just Do It.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:05 AM

20. if dr. dean likes it

i love it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:19 AM

22. Agreed...

We've already got a deal on the table that we can live with (even if we don't like a lot of what's in it) because it lets the Bush Tax Cuts sunset (as they were SUPPOSED TO) AND it chops a lot of cash from the Pentagon. Also, the GOP will get the blame for not getting a BETTER deal cut. Dean is correct in my opinion, and while it might suck in the short term, I'm not scared.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:28 AM

23. Here's the clip:

Ready to go off the cliff? Geithner says: ‘Oh absolutely.’
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45755883/ns/msnbc-the_last_word/#50096546

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:34 AM

24. agreed. If there is a deal there won't be cuts to defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:41 AM

26. Saw him, and yes, he's right...

And it can only help Obama get his way if the Repubs think he has full support of even progressives not to give in....

I was a bit surprised when he didn't suggest that the President not back down, but this way is better if it gives a better outcome no matter what way the Pres decides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fadedrose (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:09 AM

37. Just wanted to line up our pictures of Howie!



K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:43 AM

27. That would include tax increases for almost everyone (including the middle class)

which will definitely slow the economy. OTOH, the rates would be similar to those during the Clinton years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:56 AM

28. It seems to me that there just aren't enough decent paying jobs,

and there really haven't been for a long time.

Part of it is that executives seem to think that what they do deserves what would have been seen as sinfully enormous compensation just forty years ago.

Another is that stockholders and bondholders aren't content with 6-8% returns like they were only 30 years ago.

But I think that the big problem is the giant sucking sound of jobs going to countries where people and the earth are exploited beyond belief according to the economic theory of some guy from Chicago who had some idea of a pure market that doesn't exist and never will. Moreover, our lawmakers seem to be making laws as though no other country in the world is trying to get every advantage it can in every conceivable way despite the words of the oracle from Chicago, who only seems to be laughed at every place but here.

Unless we confront the greed at the top and the ridiculousness of the Chicago religion, we'll never have a decent country again, and I don't think that the current dramas are really going to make this country anything like the one I remember from 1955-1980. And yes, the post-Vietnam years were a helluva lot better than this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:03 AM

30. I've read several times lately, that of all the new wealth created in America

last year, the top 1% got 93%. The rest of us (99%) split the remaining 7%.
I propose that we pay tax according to the share of the nation's income we net. The top 1% then would pay 93% of the tax while the rest of us split the remaining 7%.
That sounds fair to me.

Don't be fooled into believing that the rich can't bail us out alone. They easily can and should.
They are the beneficiaries of four decades of economic growth created by the most productive workers in the world while those same workers have lost economic ground. Their wealth came at the expense of ours. They owe us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:06 AM

31. I know I would.

 

Dr. Dean is the most insightful and reliable guide that rank and file Democrats have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:22 AM

33. Robert Reich calls it a small hill & he says just do it. I agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 01:37 AM

34. The problem I have with it all...

is that the Democrats knew when they were in charge that there were loopholes that needed to be closed and there was not enough revenue coming in and that there was going to be a day of reckoning and they did nothing.

Now we have a President and a Party that believes we can get through one of the worst economic downturns in our lifetimes and nobody has to feel any pain. Nothing. Nobody.

It is only going to get worse if we kick it down the road. More cuts will be necessary because of the deficits that we refuse to tackle. We need to bite the bullet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #34)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 06:23 AM

38. Not for lack of trying though. Right-wing Democrats held up debate on reform.

Remember what happened to the Public Option once Nancy Pelosi passed it to the Senate? The Senate killed it; there were right-wing Democrats in the Senate who were threatening to defect on the entire bill if the Public Option wasn't deleted entirely.

The same hurdle is there for any piece of legislation considered too progressive. Those right-wing Dems would threaten to jump ship again unless those bills were watered down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 03:58 AM

36. ROLL BACK THE CLOCK TO 1999!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:51 AM

42. Dang! He's right

Plus the markets know it's just about teh crazy.

Let's go, rev 'er up.

Howie I'll go wit ya like Thelma und Louise

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:53 AM

43. I agree with him.

The fucking military MUST be cut and not just a little. It's dragging this nation into a black hole it will never get back out of. We could cut the war machine's budget in halve and still be spending WAY too much on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread