The Fiscal Cliff is real for those who will lose their food stamps

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:53 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

1. Can you explain what the fiscal cliff and losing foodstamps have in common?

I obviously missed something, TIA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Melinda (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:56 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

2. Part of the fiscal cliff is the sequestration

which make severe cuts in many programs including food stamps. So if we go off the cliff many will lose their food stamps in 2 weeks. Which means in 2 weeks many of the most vunerable won't be able to feed themselves or their families.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:06 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

5. I hear what you're saying, but it won't be quite like you suggest.

IF cuts are made to SNAP, changes would be not take place immediately... the program R&R's would have to be administratively rewritten and formulation of eligibility and subsidy amounts recalculated. Any person currently receiving SNAP benefits must be administratively notified of any changes to benefits at least ten days in advance, and that party has the legal right to appeal those changes (benefits must remain the same while the appeals process is in motion - generally about 6-8 weeks.

Regardless, I understand your apprehension. Many of us are just so right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Melinda (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:20 AM

stopbush (11,358 posts)

8. I am currently receiving Fed extended unemployment benefits in CA, adminstered through EDD.

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:25 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

I was notified by letter earlier this month that my Fed benefits will end at the end of this month (December) unless new legislation is passed to sustain the benefits. In fact, I received the last check scheduled for my current extended claim yesterday, so my benefits are effectively over as of this week.

Apparently, no time is necessary for these changes to take place. They're scheduled to happen for everybody in about two weeks, and I have been so notified.

Were Congress to pass another UI bill quickly, I might qualify for another round of Fed extended benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:41 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

10. Different program, different rules and regulations.

You received timely notifications re your benefits, however UI programs differ from the SNAP program. Snap applications are certified for a full year, and recipients, like those receiving EDD benefits, must be timely notified. It's the actual time period and then the right to appeal changes that differ between the programs. Both are administrative, both are governed by admin law, but the structure and administration of the programs are different.

FWIW, I know exactly how you feel. I went thru the same back in 2008, and wasn't one of those fortunate enough to get any extension. Tough times indeed. Here's hoping and praying your benefits continue, that you find a job, that our President fixes this mess and fixes it the right way.

Best of luck and good wishes.
-Melinda

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to stopbush (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:37 AM

coalition_unwilling (14,180 posts)

86. I lost my eligibility for the extended benefits back in May, 2012, when CA no longer qualified for

the fifth and final extension, the so-called Fed-Ed extension. IIRC, I received about 2 weeks' notice. Fortunately, I had savings and retirement accounts upon which to draw. But I will be keeping my fingers crossed for you.

BTW, I'm on page 1050 of 'Reclaiming History' now

(Devastating to the pro-conspiracy folks.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #86)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:33 PM

stopbush (11,358 posts)

205. Reclaiming History is a devastating read indeed.

I just assume the CTists who knock it haven't read it, as all of their fav CTs are utterly destroyed in that book.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Melinda (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:36 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

11. Yes it will.

Many have already been notified of the loss or cuts in benefits starting at the beginning of the year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:50 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

19. Sorry, but not necessarily with SNAP benefits. You are ignorant of the law, I get this.

But this isn't how the Food Stamp (SNAP) program works. Only notifications going out at this time are re-certs, or Notices of Action re eligibility changes as a result of income, household costs (standard deductions for heating/electricity/phone) or family composition. The changes you speak of are still in discussions (pending legislation). No changes to the SNAP program can be made and entered into the Federal Register until such time as prospective proposals (pending legislation) becomes law. Then and only then can the Federal Rules and Regulations be implemented and SNAP benefits impacted (changed). There has been no legislation passed, there are no pending changes to the SNAP program at this time.

To be clear - we are talking Food Stamp benefits, not Unemployment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Melinda (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:53 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

21. Go back and re-read the sequestration

You're the one who's ignorant of the reality of the situation not me. You're talking about the normal process. But that doesn't apply here. The sequestration cuts are immediate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:53 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

22. Post it, please. I'd like to see the law you believe applies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Melinda (Reply #22)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:19 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

43. Plenty of good info

from a basic google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=sequestration+cuts+to+food+stamps&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&ie=&oe=&rlz=

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #43)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:26 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

50. Thanks, I'll peruse it at work. Clock is ticking, and I have to run for now.

Appreciate the link, talk later. Have a groovy day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:00 AM

HiPointDem (17,182 posts)

217. You're misinformed.

A number of key mandatory programs are exempt from sequestration, including Social Security, Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), child nutrition, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), refundable tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, veterans' benefits, and federal retirement.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3557

The exemptions occur because the Budget Control Act is drafted as a portion of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control of Act of 1985 (BBEDCA), which contains a list of exemptions in section 255 and a list of special rules in section 256. Those two provisions of BBEDCA were most recently updated by the Statutory PAYGO Act of 2010, and are not changed in any way by the Budget Control Act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:33 PM

democrattotheend (7,442 posts)

206. I thought food stamps were exempt from sequestration

Most low income programs are, although not all. Some, like LIHEAP, are not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:57 AM

still_one (31,097 posts)

3. The cliff will force them to do something and if it doesn't then I suspect a lot of congress will be

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:01 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Looking for a new job

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to still_one (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:59 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

4. Seething???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to still_one (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:06 AM

RKP5637 (25,616 posts)

38. Most of congress should be fired for incompetency and also not representing

"we the people." Congress is a millionaires' club for egos and pursuing ones personal interests, certainly not all, but many ... and many are over impressed with their mediocre achievements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to RKP5637 (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:39 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

57. Can't disagree with you there. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to RKP5637 (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:07 AM

CrispyQ (16,050 posts)

62. The problem:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to CrispyQ (Reply #62)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:15 AM

RKP5637 (25,616 posts)

67. Exactly!!! And yet Americans keep voting them back into power ... because as some have

said, many Americans think they are just temporarily embarrassed non-millionaires, that their big reward is just around the corner. This, is a nation in serious need of some serious therapy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to RKP5637 (Reply #67)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:45 AM

coalition_unwilling (14,180 posts)

99. Technical note: I believe the phrase 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires' may have originated with

the writer John Steinbeck, although its provenance is disputed. Steinbeck indisputably used the phrase 'temporarily embarrassed capitalist."

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Steinbeck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #99)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:11 AM

RKP5637 (25,616 posts)

131. Thanks!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:12 AM

2naSalit (1,667 posts)

6. Isn't the

"fiscal cliff" the vernacular term for the sequestration?

Even so, I am on food stamps but I have been preparing for the "cliff" and stocking up on some things so I can get through the first few weeks of it should that come to pass.

I suspect it will happen but a lot of people don't realize that not all of these draconian cuts have to take place on 1/1/13. There are some remedies that many don't consider...

1. The biggest thing that will happen is the major cuts in defense spending, since we spend 2/3 more than the DoD actually needs, that's a plus. It would save us billions on day one.

2. The President has the power of Executive Order and he can use this power to extend some of these social safety net programs for an amount of time sufficient to allow the newly elected member of Congress to take office and pass some Bills to replace the tax structure and other remedies necessary.

3. With the newly elected Congress, the R's will be significantly weakened... frankly I don't know why anyone would consider trying to get anything accomplished with this totally useless crowd of obstructionists, just because the term is ending doesn't mean these leopards will suddenly change their spots and get something worthwhile accomplished.

I might take a brief hit, and I don't have any cash saved up, but I would rather wait for the newly elected Congress on 1/3/13 to come to work as I think we all have a better chance anticipating that they will be different... not so many TPs and more Dems in the Senate and the potential for rule changes on day one in the Senate that will make it tough to obstruct everything that is introduced. And maybe even a new Speaker in the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to 2naSalit (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:39 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

12. Number 2 is just not true.

The President does not have the power to do that. Congress holds the purse strings. Now you may have prepared for this but most others have not or could not. In the end you're asking other people's children to go hungry to stand up for your principles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:19 AM

0rganism (16,932 posts)

7. so you think the GOP house is going to extend foodstamps and UI?

Hell, they're already trying to slash funding for hurricane Sandy relief. Their entire MO is "partisan ideological victory", and they win over and over again because we never seem to have the guts to say "NO".

The chained-CPI is a bad deal. The president and Democrats will be in a stronger bargaining position in January, when we can propose cutting taxes instead of merely preserving W's tax cuts. Many of the people on this forum understand this, and want him to negotiate from a position of strength instead of bending over backwards to eke some half-hearted ghost of a concession from the GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to 0rganism (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:43 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

15. They have in the past.

And it is part of the current package. You're talking about a partisan political win. But the reality is that millions will suffer, not in 20 years, but in two weeks if a deal is not made.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:34 AM

JDPriestly (37,760 posts)

9. People who are young and unemployed will get jobs eventually.

We who are older have been there ourselves -- "between jobs" when no jobs were likely to become available.

Food stamps is another problem. But the Republicans will give in on that one when we bring up the reality of hungry children and when the homeless start assembling on Wall Street again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:41 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

13. Nice rationalization.

But that doesn't solve the problem that millions of people are going to suffer if we go off the fiscal cliff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:55 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

23. Yes people will suffer due to sequestration

but going over the cliff creates conditions for a healthier economy and revenue coming in long term. The planned compromise that is put on the table is not only a short term hurting on people but long term as well. Look at the damage done to the US postal service. Has that been undone yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:30 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

53. Will you suffer?

I won't but I'm more concerned about people who will. I thought liberals/progressives were supposed to be more compassionate about those in need. Most here are sounding more like republicans who rather win a political battle than actually help people who need help now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #53)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:10 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

64. You simply don't understand what a chained CPI will do...

it will hit the poor hard now and into the future. Sequestration can be dealt with on the other hand...

Sorry, but when the Obama didn't let the tax cuts expire he created the conditions for this reality to come up again today. That is the price you pay for such a pragmatic approach.

I 100% understand why he did it at the time but he can't do it again this time around. Not when Social Security is on the line...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #64)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:15 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

66. No you don't understand.

Millions will lose benefits now, in 2 weeks. Chained CPI will result in an average reduction of $50 per month after 20 years. That can be undone by a future Congress. But those who have real needs now are going to suffer. Even if sequestration in undone at the end of January, that still means that for 4 weeks many will go hungry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #66)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:21 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

72. The damage done to the US postal service

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:22 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

has yet to be undone. Republicans pretty much put a Trojan horse in (chained CPI is no different).

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/22/1084948/-Republicans-manufacture-a-crisis-for-the-Postal-Service-and-too-many-Democrats-go-along#

Hold one thought in your mind every time you read about the "crisis" the U.S. Postal Service is in: There is a crisis, but it's a manufactured one. If Congress wasn't busy applying the Shock Doctrine, the postal service would face a challenge, but one it had time to meet. Instead, we're being told by Congress and by high-level management at the post office that the crisis is now and that massive cuts are the only answer—that degrading the services the postal service offers will save it.
But before we look at the cuts being proposed, what's so manufactured about this crisis?

In 2006, the postal service generated a profit. That was the last time it did so, because in late 2006, a lame duck Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, which among other things forced the postal service to fund its retiree health benefit obligations 75 years into the future, and to do so within 10 years. Taking care of retirees is a good thing, and we've seen far too many workers expected to fill the gaps in pensions and health benefits underfunded through no fault of their own. I'm not arguing that the postal service should reverse course so far that it leaves its retirees without health care. But if you needed a single concrete example to demonstrate that this is a manufactured crisis, here it is: Congress put a burden on the postal service that no other government agency or private corporation faces, and when that causes or accelerates problems, it's taken as evidence of certain doom and the need to make deep cuts.

Sequestration can be worked on with the new Congress convenes on the other hand and will be their top priority. If the damage done to the US postal service has yet to be undone, where is the political capital for the chained CPI to be undone?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #72)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:31 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

79. You're contradicting yourself.

On one hand your saying that Congress can't undue some damage and on the other hand it can. Which is it?

And even if sequestration is reversed in February, that's still a month that other people's children will have to go hungry to stand up for your principles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #79)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:13 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

134. There will be more political will to stop Sequestration

because even Republicans are against the cuts to Defense for example. It is not a contradiction but a reality is that Sequestration is across the board the cuts for the most part where both Democrats and Republicans do not want to see happen.

Cuts to Social Security or a ball and chain to the US postal service draws very little empathy from Republicans on the other hand.

Embrace that truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #134)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:17 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

138. The truth is

anything done by Congress can be undone by another congress in the future.

And even if congress reverses the sequestration in February, it will be a harsh January for many of the needy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #53)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:08 AM

still_one (31,097 posts)

126. So what are you suggesting? Just giving into boners "plan b"? That may provide the short term

relief that you are discussing, but it will hurt many more for years come. It won't be just social security and medicare, everything that you are rightfully concerned about now will be at risk later, but worse.

The facts are the current Congress are not going to agree, and it is far better to wait for the next congress, then doing something that will hurt us for decades

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to still_one (Reply #126)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 05:02 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

215. Never once.

I suggesting that going over the cliff that so many here are for will result in suffering for a lot of people and shouldn't be celebrated with such glee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #215)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:45 AM

still_one (31,097 posts)

221. you are right. However, since we last discussed, the republicans didn't even want their own plan.

It looks more and more like we are going over the cliff

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to still_one (Reply #221)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:51 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

223. Unfortunately

But maybe the implosion of the GOP means the Dems can get a better deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #223)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:34 AM

still_one (31,097 posts)

225. I hope so

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 02:16 AM

JDPriestly (37,760 posts)

214. The money is owed to the people on Social Security and to the federal retirees.

The federal government is obligated to pay all debts. That is in the 14th Amendment. Read it.

If it doesn't pay for other programs, the government will not be defaulting. If it doesn't pay for Social Security or for other federal pensions, seems to me it is defaulting. The Supreme Court has ruled that Social Security payments can be changed in this way, but it's my generation who paid extra into the Social Security Trust Fund beginning around 1985 under Reagan. It's my generation that loaned that money to the government, and now it is my generation that is having its benefits cut.

Somehow, when the government has to cut Social Security benefits, it's pretty much over for everyone. It means that we are a nation that can't pay its bills, that is in default, that is on the decline.

Now it is people on Social Security. And when our benefits have been cut, the government will cut the programs that you rely on -- and also raise your taxes.

And then we will have social unrest in the country.

We need to tackle our trade imbalance. Because it is our "free" trade policy that has cost us jobs, and the tax revenue that people generate when they have good jobs.

Chaining the CPI is a fools' gold. It will make the president and Congress feel like they have solved a problem when they have only made it worse. Seniors spend their Social Security money or repay it in taxes. That money stays in our economy. Relatively little of it is spent on new shoes from China or new cars from Japan, etc. It's spent on groceries and bus fare and things like that. Seniors that have incomes over $40,000 pay a lot if not all of their Social Security back into the general fund in the form of taxes.

http://moneyover55.about.com/od/taxtips/a/Social-Security-Taxation-for-Marrieds-Case-Study-3.htm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #214)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 05:04 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

216. I don't disagree

But going over the cliff should not be celebrated because a lot of people are going to suffer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:38 AM

SummerSnow (938 posts)

55. I was just thinking about cuts to the Section 8 program

Lots of people will lose that I guess

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to JDPriestly (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:35 AM

renie408 (9,193 posts)

85. I am 48 and have two kids and an 81 year old mother who lives with me.

Thanks for throwing me and my whole family under a bus so that you can have your increases be .05 x's higher than otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:41 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

14. Cuts due to the so-called "fiscal cliff" can be undone in January

Cuts made in a compromise can't be undone - we'll have them forever.

Both hurt poor people and cause people to go hungry.

I'd rather have cuts that can be undone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:45 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

16. If you can't feed your kids for the first few weeks in January

That can't be undone. The chained CPI CAN be undone if the Dems retake the House in '14 or '16.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:47 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

17. We won't retake the house

due to gerrymandering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:03 AM

Liberalynn (5,547 posts)

30. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:09 AM

RKP5637 (25,616 posts)

39. +1, n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:51 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

20. Good post

We can pick up the pieces from the fiscal cliff. Undoing the damage to social security will be very difficult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:37 AM

renie408 (9,193 posts)

87. The fact that they are making these 'cuts' now implies that they could be

undone. Otherwise, how are they being done now?

And what PROOF does anyone have that whatever panicked deal they come up with in January will be so much better than whatever panicked deal they come up with NOW? Because of small changes in the make up of the House?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to renie408 (Reply #87)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:40 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

91. Why do you put the word "panicked" in front of the deal for January

instead of now? I think the panic is now, and yes the house makeup is worse now, so for those two reasons now will be worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to renie408 (Reply #87)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:23 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

147. The fiscal cliff talk will be no more come January

and the attention will then shift to towards Sequestration.

That is how we know. If that is confusing, that is understandable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:49 AM

Riftaxe (2,301 posts)

18. reminding people about the unemployment benifits

and the rest will brand you as a right wing troll.

God forbid you care about those in poverty...it is just not done on this board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Riftaxe (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:55 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

24. Nice broad brush you swing there.

But you are of course, quite wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Melinda (Reply #24)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:57 AM

Riftaxe (2,301 posts)

26. It is my understanding unemployment benefits are one of

the things on the chopping block.

As a matter of a fact, i think i can back that up...care to do the same?

go away troll

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Riftaxe (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:11 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

40. You say Duers don't care about those in poverty, then respond to me with a personal attack?

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:15 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

Atypical.

Sorry, edited to finish point.

At no place in this thread will you find me disagreeing that UI benefits are on the chopping block. Why answer as you did?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Melinda (Reply #40)

Riftaxe This message was hidden by Jury decision.

Response to Riftaxe (Reply #41)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:24 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

47. ....

Sorry, but I haven't the interest to continue this discussion. I don't like confrontation of any kind, and even more so with strangers on the net. Take care, goodbye.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Riftaxe (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:56 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

25. Many, many people relying on social security are poor

You're aware of that, right? Not wanting cuts to social security IS because we care about the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:01 AM

Riftaxe (2,301 posts)

28. Oh dear, i suspect i am a hell of a lot more aware of

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:02 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

it then you.

If you care about the poor and those in poverty you are not the average DU'r anyways.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Riftaxe (Reply #28)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:06 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

36. You're making some huge assumptions about me

You don't know me or what work I do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:02 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

29. Look this is a lose lose situation for the poor

we are simply arguing which is more palatable (morbid but a grim reality). Going over the cliff means all the tax cuts expire which means revenue is actually coming in for a change.

Would that stall the economy? Possibly, especially along with the sequestration. But what is proposed to be done to social security and who knows what else in this "compromise" is far worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:04 AM

Riftaxe (2,301 posts)

32. There is no arguing that

However, does not mean we have to smile while it goes down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:04 AM

Liberalynn (5,547 posts)

33. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:22 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

46. So you're arguing that it is better

that people lose essential benefits in 2 weeks than a slight reduction in benefits, which can be undone when the Dems retake the House, in 20 years time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #46)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:25 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

49. The damage done to the US postal service

has yet to be undone....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:06 AM

Liberalynn (5,547 posts)

35. Well said

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:26 PM

RebelOne (26,845 posts)

193. Yup, and I am one of the poor collecting social security. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Riftaxe (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:20 AM

hfojvt (31,318 posts)

140. God forbid you use Republican logic

"I am only passing these tax cuts for the rich, because I care about those in poverty."

That was never a believeable defensee for Bush, and it is not a believable defense for Obama. It's nothing but political cover, using the poor as a shield to benefit the wealthy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:00 AM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

27. Yours is exactly the reaction Obama is counting on to let him cut SS for everybody

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:27 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

51. So being concerned about people

losing essential benefits in 2 weeks is better that a slight reduction in SS benefits in 20 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #51)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:40 AM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

58. Nothing could say better how Obama is turning needy people against each other in order to

Protect the oligarchy from feeling the slightest twinge of pain. ANY cut to SS is totally unnecessary, and it will eventually affect everyone who relies on SS in the future, hurting the vast majority of us. If we don't fight this proposal tooth and nail now, the fiscal cliff is only the beginning of the pain. Obama is counting on dividing and conquering us so he can appease the Repugs, who won't be satisfied until social safety net programs are totally decimated. Maybe you're willing to go along with it and be grateful for the temporary crumbs you get in return for zero future security, I am not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #58)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:18 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

71. So everything in Obama's fault.

It's not the fault of those on the left who stayed home in 2010 and let the GOP take control of the House?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:11 AM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

132. It IS Obama's fault. He's making a totally unnecessary concession. If he hadn't been doing that

from day one of his administration, if he had been an advocate for the 99% instead of the 1%, if he hadn't made nice with Republicans instead of criticizing his own base, maybe more people would have bothered to vote in 2010 instead of feeling that it didn't really matter whom they voted for after all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #132)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:14 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

135. The President is not perfect

but not everything is his fault. The problem is that after the 2008 election most on the left thought they had done their job and went home. At the same time the Tea Party mobilized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #135)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:22 AM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

144. That was then. Obama has now been reelected with a comfortable margin. Yet he is still offering

up a totally unnecessary concession to the Repugs. That IS his fault, that is totally on Obama, and it better make you think about what else he is willing to give up to them in the next four years, if we don't all stand together and say that any cuts that hurt any of us hurt all of us!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #144)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:35 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

159. Sorry but that is not reality

You seem to think that if the President takes an uncompromising stand the GOP will eventually bend to his will. That is just not going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #159)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:48 AM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

169. Please don't attribute thought to me that I don't have. What I do think is that Obama offering

totally unnecessary -- do you get that? TOTALLY UNNECESSARY! -- SS cuts to the Repugs signals his willingness to keep going until they have everything they want, which is to pull the safety net out from everyone. Obama appears to have very little will to stand up to Repugs at all, unless he is giving a campaign speech trying to get Dems to elect or reelect him. When push comes to shove, Obama doesn't even wait for Repugs to demand something, he offers it up first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #169)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:51 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

173. Again that is your opinion.

You don't know what or what is not necassary or unnecessary. You seem to be coming from a view that everything the President does is bad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #173)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:02 PM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

182. No it is REALITY. SS has NOTHING to do with the deficit. That is a fact.

And once again, you attribute views to me that I don't have instead of sticking to the particular issues under discussion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #182)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:07 PM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

185. That is true.

And we still don't know if SS will be part of the final deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:32 PM

frylock (19,050 posts)

194. the left didn't stay home in 2010..

your beef is with young voters, minorities, and women. they stayed home in 2010.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to frylock (Reply #194)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:56 PM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

208. Maybe so

But I recall many on this board who said they were not voting in 2010.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #208)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:36 PM

frylock (19,050 posts)

211. Democrats Try to Crack Mystery of the Missing Voters

A popular theory of this year's midterm election holds that Democrats took a shellacking in part because big chunks of the party's core liberal base, discouraged at the path of the Obama administration, stayed home rather than show up to vote as they did in 2008.

It's an interesting narrative. It also doesn't appear to be entirely accurate.

While it's correct that some key parts of the Democratic coalition—young voters and African-Americans among them—didn't perform as they did in 2008, evidence emerging as the dust settles from this month's election suggests the bigger hole in the side of the Democratic ship came from moderates in the political center who didn't show up. (Those absences were in addition to the wave of independent swing voters also from the center who, exit polls showed, turned out but switched their votes to the Republicans.)

<more>

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703559504575630453372436666.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #51)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:13 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

65. No one is cheering about either option

because it hurts the poor either way. But for once we have to think the long term. We are here at this point because of the choices of the past (extension of Bush tax cuts, Payroll holiday). Worst part is that Social Security has nothing to do with the general deficit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #65)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:16 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

69. And the long term is that

any changes to SS can be undone by a future congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #69)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:29 AM

duffyduff (975 posts)

78. The problem is it won't.

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:30 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

There is a large faction of both parties that wants to see it done away with or weaken it to the point it is useless for people.

Neo-liberal beliefs are a poison to both political parties.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to duffyduff (Reply #78)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:04 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

123. You don't know that.

You're making an assumption and a very extreme one as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #123)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:12 AM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

133. You're making by far the more dangerous and unsupportable assumption, all to defend a president

who doesn't deserve it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #133)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:19 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

139. In your opinion.

Actually I've said little to defend the President. I've been talking about the issues. It's you who brought up the President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #139)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:24 AM

MotherPetrie (1,879 posts)

149. It all comes down to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:20 AM

Chan790 (13,760 posts)

141. in that case he's won. (If that's his agenda)

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:23 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Because I'll call every Democratic Congresscritter (Senators Mikulski & Cardin and Rep. Van Hollen) I have and the WH switchboard to say I support the chained-CPI if it gets my UI extended as long as the Bush tax-cut extension for earners over $250K is not on the table.

We can change the CPI again later. We're going to kill the poor now if we don't make a deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Chan790 (Reply #141)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:33 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

157. Good luck to you.

In a perfect world your unemployment benefits should be extended without any cuts to SS. But we don't live in a perfect world so we have to make a deal that helps the most people now. Any fixes can be done by a future congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:04 AM

Puzzledtraveller (1,878 posts)

31. I work in SNAP, there are no changes coming, cliff or no cliff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:05 AM

Liberalynn (5,547 posts)

34. Thank you for clearing that up

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:06 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

37. Hey Puzzledtraveller,

when would sequestration kick in for the SNAP program? Lots of misinformation floating around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #37)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:22 AM

Melinda (5,244 posts)

45. If the 2012 Farm Bill does not pass, then the previous Farm Bill remains in effect

The Farm Bill (covers SNAP benefits) is up for renewal every 5 years. If it does not pass Congress by January 1, the previous Bill remains in effect... no changes for now. Farmers and others not happy with this bill either... little to no chance it passes as is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #37)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:24 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

48. It kicks in immediately.

There is a $7.7 billion reduction in the program for 2013 if the sequestration happens. Some here are trying to deny that reality but it will happen if we go over the cliff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #48)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:06 AM

HiPointDem (17,182 posts)

219. you seem to be spreading misinformation.

A number of key mandatory programs are exempt from sequestration, including Social Security, Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), child nutrition, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), refundable tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, veterans' benefits, and federal retirement.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3557

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to HiPointDem (Reply #219)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:52 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

224. No I made a mistake

The federal program is not being cut. The problem is that aid to states is being cut and as a result state programs are taking a hit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:39 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

56. Really?

I have a friend who got a letter last week stating that her benefits will be cut in half starting the first week of the year. Since the program is administered on the state level maybe they are doing things differently. But the sequester calls for a $7.7 Billion reduction in 2013. It is denying reality to think that it won't have an immediate impact on some people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #56)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:44 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

60. From whom specifically did she get the letter?

I'm worried that we're being put in the middle of a divide-and-conquer game. Like they're trying to get people who are struggling fighting against other people who are struggling to see which one wins between those two, so that both groups keep their eyes off them as they make cuts to all the programs people count on.

I think the idea that this is a fight between social security and food stamps is intentional disinformation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #60)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:16 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

68. Absolutely

"I think the idea that this is a fight between social security and food stamps is intentional disinformation"

Do you want your hand or foot cut off ?

What kind of choice is that?

Social Security has nothing to do with the general deficit. Can we all agree on this one point? If not, the misinformation is working....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #60)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:28 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

77. From whatever government agency

administrates the program. I didn't see the letter, she only told me about it.

And that there is a difference between cuts to food stamps, unemployment and other benefits that will happen in 2 weeks vs. an average reduction of $50 per month in 20 years is not disinformational. It is reality. SS changes can be fixed and reversed by a future Congress before anyone is harshly affected. But even if Congress reverses the sequestration in Febuary, there are millions who will suffer for the first few weeks of the year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #77)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:35 AM

MadHound (34,179 posts)

84. Stop spreading your stupid bullshit up and down this thread,

Food stamps and Medicaid are shield from sequestration, I and others have linked to articles that state that specifically. Medicare cuts are cuts to providers, not patients. Extension of federal unemployment insurance is not part of sequestration, but rather part of this grand bargain being concocted and may or may not be part of the final deal.

Again, this all has been proven through links by multiple posters.

Meanwhile, cuts to SS will effect generations, badly.

So stop trying to scare people into a bad deal that is against their best interests. Stop spreading your stupid, Third Way, DLC, neoliberal, disproven bullshit up and down this thread and on these boards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:48 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

101. It's not just Food Stamps and Medicare

It's extened unemployment insurance that will end in January. It cuts to housing assistance and energy subsidies for low-income people. It's the more than 200,000 children who could be dropped from the Head Start program

That's the reality of the situation and you're efforts to censor me because it doesn't fit with your partisan ideology will not succeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #101)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:55 AM

MadHound (34,179 posts)

111. And again, none of it takes place right away,

Federal agencies are looking to delay the cuts if we go over the fiscal cliff, in order to allow time and space for true legislation to take place instead of this governance by crisis.

Furthermore, the amount of money cut out of programs is not going to happen all at once, but rather be spread out over a ten year period, giving Congress time to reverse the effects and retroactively reinstate benefits.

And again, as far as the unemployment extension goes, it isn't part of sequestration, but rather it is part of the grand bargain that is currently being negotiated. We have no idea whether it will or won't be included, but if it isn't, as you say, it expires at the end of January, and a deal can be done separately in order to extend it.

Stop spreading your disinformation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #111)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:03 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

120. Some will take place right away.

People are already getting letters informing them of benefit cuts in 2 weeks. Some who have received them have commented on this thread. And if those things can be undone, any change to SS can be undone by a future Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #120)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:11 AM

MadHound (34,179 posts)

130. Really? Then scan the letter and let us see it,

Because the frank fact of the matter is that SNAP and other such programs are only going to be cut 10% at most over the next ten years. If that is the case, then there is no way that you "friend" can be getting her benefits slashed in half, at least at the federal level. Sounds more like this is something happening in her state.

And yes, those changes can be undone, and as I've shown, various federal agencies are ready to delay cuts if we go over the cliff.

Reality, it's your friend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #130)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:22 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

145. Yes it was from a state agency.

But I'm not at liberty to scan someone else's private mail.

And I agree that any changes can be undone including changes to SS. But I rather see a change that can be undone long before people will see a significant impact than ones that will impact people in 2 weeks. That is the reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #145)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:41 AM

MadHound (34,179 posts)

164. Thank you, you finally admitted that at least one thing that you're posting is BS

A state agency, nothing to do with the federal government, nothing to do with the fiscal cliff.

So when are you going to admit that the rest of what you're spewing is BS as well?

Oh, and again, as I've shown you time and again, the sequestration cuts are not going to effect everybody all at once, in two weeks. Again, federal agencies are willing to suspend the cuts if we go over the cliff in order to allow time and space for real negotiations, not these contrived, rushed deals we have now. Oh, and again, the cuts take place all at once, but over ten years.

Stop spreading the bullshit. Just stop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #164)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:56 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

178. Stop trying to censor me.

And state food stamp programs get funding from the federal government. Same as extended unemployment insurance. The states administrate them but they're funded by the federal governemt. So anyone in those programs IS going to see a cut in 2 weeks.

You're the one spreading the BS here. You rather win some imagined partisan victory that help real people in need who are going to be immediately impacted if we go off the cliff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #120)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:53 AM

obamanut2012 (9,971 posts)

222. not true at all

stop it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:54 AM

Owl (1,674 posts)

107. +1

Thanks MadHound!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:04 AM

whatchamacallit (7,814 posts)

122. +Graham's Number

Such transparent bullshit...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:51 AM

ProudProgressiveNow (3,239 posts)

172. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:09 PM

Catherina (29,086 posts)

187. Thank you. You speak for me too. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #77)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:42 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

94. We are not going to have Congress on our side any time in the foreseeable future

due to gerrymandering. We just won't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #94)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:43 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

97. Maybe not in 2 years

But maybe in 4 or 6 or 8.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #97)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:49 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

103. I doubt it

Most of those seats are very very secure, and we can't undo the gerrymandering unless we gain control of the House. We can't get the House because of the gerrymandering. It's a circular problem but there is no solution any time certainly within a generation or so. We need major population changes and shifts for any chance at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #103)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:55 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

112. It may take 10 years

but it will happen. And there are major population shifts happening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #112)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:02 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

119. In 10 years

A lot more than just cuts to Social Security will have taken place. They'll start with cuts here, and then they'll manufacture another scare term, and then they'll want cuts someplace else, and they'll say, "This is perfectly reasonable. You made cuts to Social Security last time." We can't give ground on these things. Look at Ryan's budget if you want to see what they want our economy to look like.

Also, 10 years (at least) of cuts to poor people on social security is better than a month of cuts to poor people on food stamps?

The only people who should be having cuts are the top earners. We can't willingly give ground on cuts to anyone. If something happens due to a calendar, we can undo it. We can't undo anything done on purpose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #119)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:09 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

128. That is supposition

Let's deal in current reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #128)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:10 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

129. Current reality is that we can't undo social security cuts and won't be able to in the foreseeable

future. Current reality is that Congress is not going to keep people without food stamps. Any thought that we might ever be able to retake the house is supposition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #129)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:24 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

148. So your saying that GOP

is going to control the House forever. That the Dems will never win a majority there ever again. Sorry but history would tend to dispute you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #148)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:26 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

151. Probably not forever

but 20, 30 years? I don't know how long it'll take. They've gerrymandered the districts and there are trends pointing to eventual demographic changes that will change things but they're way out on the horizon. "Forever" was hyperbole, I'll admit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #60)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:43 AM

lumberjack_jeff (24,550 posts)

96. Agreed. The intention disinfo program is harmful. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #56)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:54 AM

Puzzledtraveller (1,878 posts)

61. I think it's the difference between SNAP receiving cuts in the program

and the effects of other budgetary measures, state and federal that may result in the reduction of benefits for some recipients. That may be possible. As for the program itself SNAP is not part of the sequestration. So you may be correct in your thinking, as another poster replied but not exactly in the manor it would happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #61)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:22 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

73. But there is still a $7.7 Billion cut to Food Stamps

in the sequestration. To think that is not going to have an immediate impact for some is naive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:18 AM

Report1212 (484 posts)

42. Wrong, wrong, and wrong

The UI and food stamps are unrelated to the sequester and to the tax cuts. They can be dealt with separately.

The medicare cuts are to providers, not beneficiaries.

Please read up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Report1212 (Reply #42)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:20 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

44. They are not unrelated.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82483.html

http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2012/08/sequestration_blues_automatic.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #44)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:27 AM

Report1212 (484 posts)

52. Articles still missing the mark

Like Social Security, these issues are foisted into fiscal talks for no reason. They do not happen as part of the sequester or expiration of Bush tax cuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Report1212 (Reply #52)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:32 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

54. They are part of the sequester

Whether you're willing to admit it or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:41 AM

yodermon (4,770 posts)

59. According to this link, SNAP (food stamps) are NOT affected by the sequester.

http://www.nwlc.org/resource/roadmap-upcoming-federal-budget-debates

January 2, 2013: Automatic, across-the-board spending cuts – known as sequestration (or “the sequester”) – are scheduled to begin. The sequester would cut $109.3 billion from the federal budget each year between 2013 and 2021, divided equally between defense and non-defense programs.

While Social Security benefits and key mandatory programs for low-income people (including Medicaid and SNAP/Food Stamps) generally would be exempt from sequestration, discretionary programs that women and their families depend on – such as Head Start, child care, and women’s health services – could be slashed dramatically, cutting jobs and services for millions. In 2013, sequestration would cut a total of $38.5 billion from non-defense discretionary programs (an 8.4 percent cut).

The sequester was established by the Budget Control Act (BCA), enacted in August 2011 in response to demands from some Members of Congress who threatened to refuse to raise the national debt ceiling. In the name of deficit reduction, the BCA requires about $2 trillion in spending cuts – but zero new revenues – over ten years. More than half of these cuts ($1.2 trillion) are to be enforced through sequestration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to yodermon (Reply #59)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:34 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

83. Thank you for the link

that should clear up some of the confusion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to yodermon (Reply #59)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:53 AM

ProudProgressiveNow (3,239 posts)

174. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to yodermon (Reply #59)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:40 PM

frylock (19,050 posts)

197. but but my friend got a letter..

don't know where it came from or what it sez, but teh letters!!1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:08 AM

MadHound (34,179 posts)

63. Stop spreading disinformation

People won't lose their food stamps, or Medicaid, those are shielded from sequestration. Medicare cuts will effect providers.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/29/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-spending-cuts/index.html

As far as the extension of the emergency unemployment benefits go, that is not part of sequestration, that is a deal that is on the table to be part of avoiding the fiscal cliff.

Furthermore, you are neglecting to mention that all of these cuts, to both the military and domestic spending will be spread out over ten years, they won't take place all at once, immediately on January 1st. You are also neglecting to mention that various federal agencies are now ready to hold off on the cuts if we go over the cliff in order to provide lawmakers time to get a deal done. Furthermore, you also neglect to mention that all of these cuts can be dealt with retroactively, thus a person might experience a bit of short term pain for a week or two(if the federal agencies don't hold off the cuts), but will get all that money or assistance back once a true deal is done.

The only, one and only thing that has to be dealt with before the end of this year is the Alternative Minimum Tax patch, and that does not effect the poor and needy, but rather the middle class and upper middle class.

Finally I find it reprehensible that you are here spreading disinformation in an effort to scare people into a bad deal that will lower the quality of life for the elderly for generations to come. How dare you try and take food out of my mouth, out of their mouth in our old age! Have you no shame? How stupid is it to advocate short term gain at the expense of long term pain.

So please, stop trying to spread your bullshit here, it won't work. Take your Third Way, DLC, neo-liberal scare tactics and shove them. . . well, you can fill in the rest from there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #63)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:26 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

75. MadHound

that is exactly how I understand the situation. We already have been down this road where short term pain was averted when the tax cuts were extended. We are back at this point again, and if the tax cuts are not allowed to expire we will be at this point again. Everyone that visits DU and actively posts here should know that Social Security has nothing to do with the general deficit. If this one fact people can't accept we have a lot of work to do to thwart the disinformation floating around...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #63)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:40 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

90. That's not the whole story.

http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2012/08/sequestration_blues_automatic.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82483.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #90)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:59 AM

MadHound (34,179 posts)

116. Stop spreading your disinformation,

Even one of the blogs you linked to mentioned that sequestration cuts are to be spread out over ten years.

And as I've proven, federal agencies are looking to delay the cuts if we go over the cliff in order to allow Congress the time and space to work out a deal.

Stop spreading your Third Way/DLC/neoliberal bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to MadHound (Reply #63)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:54 AM

ProudProgressiveNow (3,239 posts)

175. +1000 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:17 AM

forestpath (2,081 posts)

70. So old people are to be the sacrificial lambs. Gotcha. That's the new meme around here.

And it's soooooooooooooooooo liberal and progressive!

Just one little thing you're conveniently forgetting.

Everyone who manages to live long enough will one day go over the jagged-edged cliff that Obama has prepared for old people. So your concern about everyone else now is laughably phoney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to forestpath (Reply #70)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:33 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

81. So the poor and unemployed or sacrificial lambs instead.

How liberal and progressive of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #81)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:46 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

100. No one should be a sacrificial lamb

We can undo anything that happens due to the so-called "fiscal cliff", but we can't undo any changes made to social security. We will never have enough seats in Congress due to gerrymandering. Any changes made to social security will be 1) permanent, and 2) just the tip of the iceberg. The neocon plan is to get rid of things like social security, and food stamps, and unemployment, and medicare, permanently. We can see things happen without giving in, and then fix it, without giving them any leeway. But we can't be a part of intentionally getting rid of any of those programs or we open the floodgates. Within a generation, all of those protections could be gone. It's happened in other countries that follow the economic plan that the Republicans want us to follow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #100)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:52 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

106. Why?

Why can Congress not undo one thing but can undo something else. You're condradicting yourself. There is no logic in your arguement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #106)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:54 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

108. The Republicans won't vote en masse to end food stamps

Those will be reinstated. That isn't a compromise, and enough Republicans won't win their seats (in the Republican primary against other Republicans) if they get rid of Food stamps in January that they'll reinstate them. No Democrats will get their seats, but other Republicans will.

There is no way to reverse a compromise we make now on Social Security. We will never have the votes to undo that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #108)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:57 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

114. That is not logical

One hand your saying Congress can't do something and on the other hand you're saying the can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #114)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:03 AM

gollygee (12,355 posts)

121. You must not know much about Congress

They will have enough votes to do thing A, but they won't have enough votes to do thing B. That's how Congress works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to gollygee (Reply #121)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:27 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

152. Yes it does.

And what they don't have enough votes for thing B now, they may have in a future Congess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #81)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:48 AM

forestpath (2,081 posts)

102. You are the ones insisting it is either/or. One day everyone will go over Obama's cliff.

So you really aren't concerned about protecting anyone except President Obama in his cruelty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to forestpath (Reply #102)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:54 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

110. I see more cruelty

in those here who want to go over the fiscal cliff to win an ideological victory despite that it will cause suffer for millions of the needy in the next few weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #110)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:06 AM

forestpath (2,081 posts)

124. The cruelty is using seniors for scapegoats. That's what you and President Obama are doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to forestpath (Reply #124)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:25 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

150. So it is better to make the poor and needy scapegoats now.

That's what you are doing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:24 AM

treestar (40,523 posts)

74. True, why is anyone even putting that on the table?

the same people who are saying how it is horrible to even put the slightest modification on SS on the table are at the same time advocating this. There's a down side and an up side either way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to treestar (Reply #74)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:34 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

82. Because

They rather score an ideological, partsan win than really help people in need.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #82)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:44 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

98. Saving Social Security is

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:45 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

more than just an ideological victory.

The program's genesis was based on the high percentage of elderly in the U.S. that lived in poverty (greater than 50% based on some estimates).

Attacking the foundation out of this great program is a direct attack against those in poverty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #98)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:50 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

104. So the hell with the poor and needy now?

That is trying to score an ideological victory now. If if you're not willing to admit it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #104)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:56 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

113. A chained CPI is immediate once in place

It hurts the poor and needy now and well into the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #113)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:00 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

117. And it can always be reversed

long before there is significant impact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #117)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:22 AM

durablend (2,927 posts)

143. It'll NEVER be reversed

But I can see we're talking ourselves blue in the face trying to convince you of the reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to durablend (Reply #143)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:36 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

161. It's not reality to say

it will never be reversed. I'm not saying that it definately would be. I'm just saying that it is possible in the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #113)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:07 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

125. Yes it is immediate.

Someone getting $1000 a month will get a COLA increase of $27 instead of $30. And the future impact is greater. But that can always be undone by a future congress. Versus those who will lose substantial benefits that they need to live on in two weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #125)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:16 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

137. Their has to be a political will for that to be undone

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:17 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Republicans have no interest in cooperating with undoing the CPI or even some blue dog Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #137)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:39 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

163. But we can create that political will

It may take years to do so and change congress but it can happen. It took years for women to get the right to vote but it happened. It took a century for civil rights but it happened. It took years for gay marrige but it is happening. The CPI change can be undone, we just have to make it happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:27 AM

Autumn (11,310 posts)

76. What a load of nonsense

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/29/news/economy/fiscal-cliff-spending-cuts/index.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Autumn (Reply #76)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:42 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

95. Not nonsense

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82483.html

http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2012/08/sequestration_blues_automatic.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:31 AM

Marr (13,676 posts)

80. This is the same phony 'hide behind the poor' bullshit we heard two years ago, when

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:33 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

all the corporate Democrats suddenly cared SO MUCH about extending unemployment benefits, and refused to acknowledge that the Republicans had backed down from that fight every time in the past, and their threats were empty.

'We can't let those Bush Tax Cuts expire on us--er, I mean the wealthy, you guys-- we're only thinking of the POOR!!!'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Marr (Reply #80)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:37 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

88. Not phoney if you're dependant on Food Stamps or

extended unemployment benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #88)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:00 AM

Autumn (11,310 posts)

118. Food stamp are shielded. If you run out of benefits you qualify for help

What you are doing is neither liberal or progressive. I want the fucking cliff. For Obama and these fucking politicians to steal from elderly and disabled on SS and Veterans on a pension is a fucking disgrace. This stupid evil deal steals from the most vulnerable to pay for a fucking debt that they DON"T FUCKING OWE.

Fuck it, time for everyone to suffer. Not just their fucking sacrificial lambs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Autumn (Reply #118)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:29 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

155. So it is OK

that the poor and needy suffer now so you can win an ideological victory. Thanks for making my point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #155)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:42 AM

Autumn (11,310 posts)

165. So it's okay that the poor and needy suffer so you can win an ideological victory?

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:43 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

So you can win on tax break for the wealthy? YOU made my point very well.

As for people who run out of unemployment benefits? Guess what! They qualify for food stamps and financial aid. And once again food stamps and medicare are shielded as has been pointed out several times in this thread so children are not going to go hungry. You have no point, unless you call lies and distortion a point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Autumn (Reply #165)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:01 PM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

181. When did I ever advocate for tax cuts for the wealthy.

Please show me when I ever said that. You're the one who is lying and distorting. Not me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #181)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:10 PM

Autumn (11,310 posts)

188. If you want this deal, which does nothing but harm the needy, yeah this deal is to

steal from the ones who need the most help to pay for their fucking tax breaks. A debt that the poor and needy don't owe. It has been verified several times in this thread that your OP is not the truth and yet you persist in peddling it . I am done arguing with you anddo have a nice holiday.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Autumn (Reply #188)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:14 PM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

189. Going off the fiscal cliff harms the needy

and does so in two weeks. And the deal raises taxes on the wealthy. You're the one not peddling the truth here, not me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #189)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:16 PM

Autumn (11,310 posts)

190. I'm done, have a nice holiday n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:38 AM

KharmaTrain (30,730 posts)

89. How Dare You...

...inject reality into this matter? Not only is sequestration very real and will start being felt by millions January 1...but we'll face one cliff after another. The "fun" one will be the debt ceiling where if the rushpublicans don't agree to raising it the government will shut down. No one will get checks...Social Security, Medicare...anything. Government services will close. Add to this the markets going south that will tighten credit that could lead to recession. I'm told this is fear mongering...bullshit! It's very real for a lot of people and the rushpublicans will gladly destroy peoples lives and the economy to protect their rich benefactors and make life as difficult on this administration as possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to KharmaTrain (Reply #89)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:40 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

92. Sequestration doesn't work in the manner you describe

the misinformation is working. I highly recommend you read this thread thoroughly and then offer any new insights you have because knee jerk reactions is exactly what they are hoping for using a term like "Fiscal cliff". They are trying to manufacture a visceral reaction rather than a logical one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #92)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:15 AM

KharmaTrain (30,730 posts)

136. The Debt Ceiling Is Separate From Sequestration...

http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/n/national_debt_us/index.html

That's more a fiscal wall than a cliff. If the ceiling isn't raised sometime in January or early February the government will come to a halt. I always read threads before I respond...and there's tons of misinformation about the whole budget process being thrown out around here. I'll stick with credible sources like Dr. Howard Dean and Robert Reich who are very concerned about the debt ceiling and how not coming to some kind of a deal there will create a lot of needless hardships for a lot of people...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to KharmaTrain (Reply #136)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:21 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

142. That is the point

We don't need a deal (eg. chained CPI and who knows what else) because sequestration can be dealt with separately and the fiscal cliff is a manufactured crisis. In other words you agree yes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #142)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:28 AM

KharmaTrain (30,730 posts)

154. The "Cliff" Is...The Debt Ceiling Isn't...

That's the disconnect here. Sequestration would take a while to fully implement and I think we agree that we could live with the cuts...especially on the defense side. My dream is one day people will pay attention to the billions squandered on corporate welfare that comes out of the pockets of the middle and lower classes, but that's another issue another day.

The Debt Ceiling is very much real and one that has to be addressed. It's similar to the games that Clinton and Gingrich played in '95 that led to a government shut down. In that case it backfired on the rushpublicans...and it may again...but at a cost to millions in the interim. The government will "go broke"...it won't be able to pay its bills...its credit rating will sink that will raise credit rates and the government won't be able to print checks that will hurt those who live check to check. It's not a scenario I want to see...nor does this administration...and that's at the heart of this current battle. Without the rushpublicans voting to raise the debt ceiling the government hits this real wall...and they can and will try to extort for bigger cuts. So you pick your poison here...if you have to deal something to get something, what do you deal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to KharmaTrain (Reply #154)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:37 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

162. The debt ceiling can be dealt with

but agreeing to a chained CPI for social security does nothing for the debt ceiling or little with the general deficit. That is what some people don't understand....

It is a false choice in other words done to induce hysteria and confusion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #162)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:25 PM

KharmaTrain (30,730 posts)

192. Confusion Is The Politician's Best Friend...

We're seeing a lot of that confusion here as we have several balls in the air at once here and it's all clumped together. I've said before and will continue to say that the CPI and SS should not be anywhere near the table here as the SS fund remains solvent and shouldn't be touch as it had nothing to do with creating the deficit that's at the root of this financial game. Most of that deficit was created by dubya's wars for profits and the big tax giveaways to the rich...and a good round of cuts to the corporate welfare system would go a long way in clearing up those debts, but there's no way that will fly in the rushpublican congress.

The debt ceiling HAS to be dealt with...and WILL affect almost everyone...especially those in the biggest need. There will need to be a ceiling extension passed through the House and that means convincing at least 25 or so rushpublicans along with all Democrats (no easy feat)...so what do you deal to get those 25 votes? It's gonna boil down to that...to keep the government solvent, what cuts will have to be made in social programs to get a deal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to KharmaTrain (Reply #192)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:38 PM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

196. I think that based on what happened last

time the Democrats may take a different approach with dealing the debt ceiling. Hard to say at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #196)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:57 PM

KharmaTrain (30,730 posts)

200. The Last Time...

...they negotiated the deal that's expiring now. It kicked the can past the elections. Looks like the "cliff" negotiations are breaking down...again. Supposedly CPI is off the table...and hopefully will remain that way.

For the rushpublicans the debt ceiling in the House and the changes in the filibuster rule in the Senate are their lines in the sand. I'm hopeful we can bust their asses but I don't see it happening. Remember, Boner has little real control on his caucus. The teabaggers wag the dog here...and they're more than happy to see the country go to hell. Stay tuned and happy holidays!

Cheers...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to KharmaTrain (Reply #89)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:41 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

93. LOL nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #93)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:50 AM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

105. And that right there is the response...

The U.S. media is terrible for this very reason. Outside the U.S. foreign outlets are able to lay out exactly how sequestration will work and words like the "fiscal cliff" are dismissed as jargon used to intimidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:54 AM

Tarheel_Dem (16,672 posts)

109. Tell it! But you have to assume that everyone who's carping is really a "liberal" or "progressive".

Afterall, it's the internet, where people can take on any character they choose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #109)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:09 AM

whatchamacallit (7,814 posts)

127. Ah... and here come the folks

desperate to endorse anything to put the president in a good light.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #127)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:14 AM

Cha (124,653 posts)

220. The President is Good Light.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #109)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:55 AM

great white snark (1,982 posts)

177. As msanthrope would quip: "you Better Believe It!"

Blame Obama for everything while giving Republicans a pass smells Libertarian to me.... but what would I know?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to great white snark (Reply #177)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 04:18 PM

Tarheel_Dem (16,672 posts)

213. !!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:59 AM

Enrique (22,648 posts)

115. absolute bullshit

threatening to kill the hostages is bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:23 AM

99Forever (5,168 posts)

146. Nonsense.

You are being lied to.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022038234

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to 99Forever (Reply #146)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:28 AM

Enrique (22,648 posts)

153. being lied to?

no, I think the OP is Maria Bartiromo adapting her sales pitch to DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Enrique (Reply #153)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:34 AM

99Forever (5,168 posts)

158. Maybe..

.. or maybe not. I have no reason to make that kind of accusation. Perhaps you do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:32 AM

Enrique (22,648 posts)

156. by this logic there are no limits on GOP power

they can simply threaten to kill the hostages and there's nothing we can do about it.

I find that a SUSPICIOUS argument to hear on DU, that democrats have no choice but to give the Republicans everything they want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Enrique (Reply #156)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:44 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

167. No saying the chained CPI

can never be undone is saying that there are no limits to GOP power.

And how is raising taxes on the rich, extending unemployment benefits, spending for infrastucture, etc. giving the GOP everything it wants?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:36 AM

drm604 (13,962 posts)

160. How will this affect unemployment?

Is it just extended unemployment benefits that will be affected? I was laid off at the end of November so I haven't been collecting for long (I haven't even seen a payment yet), will I be affected by this?

I'm hoping to find employment soon, but there's no guarantee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to drm604 (Reply #160)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:48 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

170. I'm not certain about this

so you may want to check with your state unemployment office but right now you'll only recieve 6 months of benefits. For the last several years Congress has extended those benefits for up to a total of 99 weeks in some states. If they go off the fiscal cliff, anyone who has exhusted their regular benefits and is currently recieving extended benefits will lose them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #170)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:28 PM

drm604 (13,962 posts)

204. I'm concerned most about my immediate benefits; the next few weeks or months.

Come hell or high water I'll have something within 6 months. I already have some part time work to supplement the UC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to drm604 (Reply #160)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:50 AM

Autumn (11,310 posts)

171. My neighbor ran out of employment benefits 2 weeks ago, She applied for aid

she received her food stamp card and TANIF ( cash) benefits yesterday. She also is getting LEAP which will help pay her heating. You should receive your unemployment benefits just fine. When the cliff diving happens the pukes should come to their senses real quick when it is hung right around their necks. When newtie boy shut down the government under Clinton, I still received my unemployment benefits although one check was a week late.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Autumn (Reply #171)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:05 PM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

184. Good for her.

But for many it is not so simple. Plus there are many other programs that will be cut. You seems to be relying that the GOP will somehow see the light in January and cave. Recent history shows that it won't happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:43 AM

Tierra_y_Libertad (36,282 posts)

166. So, what do you propose? That we go along with the Democrats caving..again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #166)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:59 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

180. Compromise is not caving.

And it is intellectually dishonest to characterize it as such.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #180)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:04 PM

Tierra_y_Libertad (36,282 posts)

183. It is when you when you you give up the most.

So, what do you propose they compromise on without caving?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #183)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:08 PM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

186. How is it the most?

Please explain that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #186)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:20 PM

Tierra_y_Libertad (36,282 posts)

191. Chained CPI, cutting more from SS than the military.

?o, where are you proposing they "compromise" and by how much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #191)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:53 PM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

207. That's still not giving up the most.

You're focusing on one point the chained CPI, which is bad, but not the massive betrayal that some are saying it is. And there is still $1.2 Trillion in tax increases on the wealthy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Reply #207)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:20 PM

Tierra_y_Libertad (36,282 posts)

210. If it's not so important why are the Republicans and 3rd Way so focused on it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:48 AM

MNBrewer (5,715 posts)

168. There are deals that would be worse for more people over the long run, in order to avoid the "cliff"

than would be harmed by our going over the "cliff".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:54 AM

whatchamacallit (7,814 posts)

176. This old chestnut gets trotted out every time

All of the 1% thank One of the 99.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to whatchamacallit (Reply #176)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:58 AM

One of the 99 (904 posts)

179. No that's the old chestnut

trying to insult and discredit anyone who disagrees with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:34 PM

NYC Liberal (15,600 posts)

195. Some would rather score a victory for their "team" than do something to help those in need.

It's happened before. Many here would rather shut everything down because they don't get exactly what they want when they want it, than cut a deal that involves any kind of compromise to protect the immediate needs of desperately needy people. It's shameful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #195)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:44 PM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

198. No that is not true at all

I am not vilifying those that support a chained CPI (I disagree with the rationale completely), so you should extend that courtesy to me at the very least.

But a compromise has to be something both sides are somewhat satisfied with. And more importantly, social security has nothing to do with the general deficit so why is this even part of the compromise.

Social security was created to help the elderly living in poverty. Protecting it is scoring political points? Really? No I don't agree at all. This is what I learned in my American civics class and American history class too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Harmony Blue (Reply #198)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:55 PM

NYC Liberal (15,600 posts)

199. I don't speak to any person in particular. However, there is a faction of the population --

and it crosses ideological and party lines -- that don't even like compromise, real compromise. Politics has become such that people want either total victory or total defeat, with total defeat being preferable to winning some and losing some.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #199)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:03 PM

Harmony Blue (2,065 posts)

203. We know the Tea party wants total victory

but that is the challenge both Obama and Boehner have. How do you reach a compromise when you have a faction that wants total victory? Look at the debt ceiling this past summer for a reminder.

A chained CPI for social security is simply off the mark for any compromise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 12:59 PM

aquart (67,538 posts)

201. Neither is being endlessly blackmailed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:01 PM

patrice (47,430 posts)

202. We need new much more co-operative ways to live and work in order to maximize tax-funded resources

Last edited Thu Dec 20, 2012, 01:04 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

of ALL kinds, including health & education, and to buffer whatever economic storms that are otherwise unavoidable.

I want to know who is interested in the most economically valuable and efficient form of exchange there is for those who are most economically dis-empowered and that would be direct exchange of Real Value/Work for Real Value/Work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:00 PM

Teamster Jeff (918 posts)

209. So, the choices are..

Cuts to food stamps, unemployment insurance ect. or cuts to SS through a chained CPI. A kick in the nuts or a punch in the face.

The question is how did we get maneuvered into the spot where these are our only choices? Who led us to this fucked up no win situation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 02:39 PM

MNBrewer (5,715 posts)

212. but

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022038234

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to One of the 99 (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:03 AM

HiPointDem (17,182 posts)

218. Food stamps are exempt.

A number of key mandatory programs are exempt from sequestration, including Social Security, Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), child nutrition, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), refundable tax credits such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, veterans' benefits, and federal retirement.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3557

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

225 replies	Author	Time	Post
The Fiscal Cliff is real for those who will lose their food stamps (Original post)	One of the 99	Dec 2012	OP
Can you explain what the fiscal cliff and losing foodstamps have in common?	Melinda	Dec 2012	#1
Part of the fiscal cliff is the sequestration	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#2
I hear what you're saying, but it won't be quite like you suggest.	Melinda	Dec 2012	#5
I am currently receiving Fed extended unemployment benefits in CA, adminstered through EDD.	stopbush	Dec 2012	#8
Different program, different rules and regulations.	Melinda	Dec 2012	#10
I lost my eligibility for the extended benefits back in May, 2012, when CA no longer qualified for	coalition_unwilling	Dec 2012	#86
Reclaiming History is a devastating read indeed.	stopbush	Dec 2012	#205
Yes it will.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#11
Sorry, but not necessarily with SNAP benefits. You are ignorant of the law, I get this.	Melinda	Dec 2012	#19
Go back and re-read the sequestration	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#21
Post it, please. I'd like to see the law you believe applies.	Melinda	Dec 2012	#22
Plenty of good info	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#43
Thanks, I'll peruse it at work. Clock is ticking, and I have to run for now.	Melinda	Dec 2012	#50
You're misinformed.	HiPointDem	Dec 2012	#217
I thought food stamps were exempt from sequestration	democrattotheend	Dec 2012	#206
The cliff will force them to do something and if it doesn't then I suspect a lot of congress will be	still_one	Dec 2012	#3
Seething???	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#4
Most of congress should be fired for incompetency and also not representing	RKP5637	Dec 2012	#38
Can't disagree with you there. nt	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#57
The problem:	CrispyQ	Dec 2012	#62
Exactly!!! And yet Americans keep voting them back into power ... because as some have	RKP5637	Dec 2012	#67
Technical note: I believe the phrase 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires' may have originated with	coalition_unwilling	Dec 2012	#99
Thanks!!!	RKP5637	Dec 2012	#131
Isn't the	2naSalit	Dec 2012	#6
Number 2 is just not true.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#12
so you think the GOP house is going to extend foodstamps and UI?	0rganism	Dec 2012	#7
They have in the past.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#15
People who are young and unemployed will get jobs eventually.	JDPriestly	Dec 2012	#9
Nice rationalization.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#13
Yes people will suffer due to sequestration	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#23
Will you suffer?	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#53
You simply don't understand what a chained CPI will do...	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#64
No you don't understand.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#66
The damage done to the US postal service	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#72
You're contradicting yourself.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#79
There will be more political will to stop Sequestration	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#134
The truth is	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#138
So what are you suggesting? Just giving into boners "plan b"? That may provide the short term	still_one	Dec 2012	#126
Never once.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#215
you are right. However, since we last discussed, the republicans didn't even want their own plan.	still_one	Dec 2012	#221
Unfortunately	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#223
I hope so	still_one	Dec 2012	#225
The money is owed to the people on Social Security and to the federal retirees.	JDPriestly	Dec 2012	#214
I don't disagree	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#216
I was just thinking about cuts to the Section 8 program	SummerSnow	Dec 2012	#55
I am 48 and have two kids and an 81 year old mother who lives with me.	renie408	Dec 2012	#85
Cuts due to the so-called "fiscal cliff" can be undone in January	gollygee	Dec 2012	#14
If you can't feed your kids for the first few weeks in January	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#16
We won't retake the house	gollygee	Dec 2012	#17
+1	Liberalynn	Dec 2012	#30
+1, n/t	RKP5637	Dec 2012	#39
Good post	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#20
The fact that they are making these 'cuts' now implies that they could be	renie408	Dec 2012	#87
Why do you put the word "panicked" in front of the deal for January	gollygee	Dec 2012	#91
The fiscal cliff talk will be no more come January	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#147
reminding people about the unemployment benifits	Riftaxe	Dec 2012	#18
Nice broad brush you swing there.	Melinda	Dec 2012	#24
It is my understanding unemployment benefits are one of	Riftaxe	Dec 2012	#26
You say Duers don't care about those in poverty, then respond to me with a personal attack?	Melinda	Dec 2012	#40
This message was hidden by jury decision.	Riftaxe	Dec 2012	#41
....	Melinda	Dec 2012	#47
Many, many people relying on social security are poor	gollygee	Dec 2012	#25
Oh dear, i suspect i am a hell of a lot more aware of	Riftaxe	Dec 2012	#28
You're making some huge assumptions about me	gollygee	Dec 2012	#36
Look this is a lose lose situation for the poor	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#29
There is no arguing that	Riftaxe	Dec 2012	#32
+1	Liberalynn	Dec 2012	#33
So you're arguing that it is better	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#46
The damage done to the US postal service	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#49
Well said	Liberalynn	Dec 2012	#35
Yup, and I am one of the poor collecting social security. n/t	RebelOne	Dec 2012	#193
God forbid you use Republican logic	hfojvt	Dec 2012	#140
Yours is exactly the reaction Obama is counting on to let him cut SS for everybody	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#27
So being concerned about people	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#51
Nothing could say better how Obama is turning needy people against each other in order to	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#58
So everything in Obama's fault.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#71
It IS Obama's fault. He's making a totally unnecessary concession. If he hadn't been doing that	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#132
The President is not perfect	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#135
That was then. Obama has now been reelected with a comfortable margin. Yet he is still offering	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#144
Sorry but that is not reality	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#159
Please don't attribute thought to me that I don't have. What I do think is that Obama offering	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#169
Again that is your opinion.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#173
No it is REALITY. SS has NOTHING to do with the deficit. That is a fact.	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#182
That is true.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#185
the left didn't stay home in 2010..	frylock	Dec 2012	#194
Maybe so	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#208
Democrats Try to Crack Mystery of the Missing Voters	frylock	Dec 2012	#211
No one is cheering about either option	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#65
And the long term is that	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#69
The problem is it won't.	duffyduff	Dec 2012	#78
You don't know that.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#123
You're making by far the more dangerous and unsupportable assumption, all to defend a president	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#133
In your opinion.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#139
It all comes down to him.	MotherPetrie	Dec 2012	#149
in that case he's won. (If that's his agenda)	Chan790	Dec 2012	#141
Good luck to you.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#157
I work in SNAP, there are no changes coming, cliff or no cliff.	Puzzledtraveller	Dec 2012	#31
Thank you for clearing that up	Liberalynn	Dec 2012	#34
Hey Puzzledtraveller,	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#37
If the 2012 Farm Bill does not pass, then the previous Farm Bill remains in effect	Melinda	Dec 2012	#45
It kicks in immediately.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#48
you seem to be spreading misinformation.	HiPointDem	Dec 2012	#219
No I made a mistake	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#224
Really?	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#56
From whom specifically did she get the letter?	gollygee	Dec 2012	#60
Absolutely	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#68
From whatever government agency	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#77
Stop spreading your stupid bullshit up and down this thread,	MadHound	Dec 2012	#84
It's not just Food Stamps and Medicare	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#101
And again, none of it takes place right away,	MadHound	Dec 2012	#111
Some will take place right away.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#120
Really? Then scan the letter and let us see it,	MadHound	Dec 2012	#130
Yes it was from a state agency.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#145
Thank you, you finally admitted that at least one thing that you're posting is BS	MadHound	Dec 2012	#164
Stop trying to censor me.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#178
not true at all	obamanut2012	Dec 2012	#222
+1	Owl	Dec 2012	#107
+Graham's Number	whatchamacallit	Dec 2012	#122
+1 nt	ProudProgressiveNow	Dec 2012	#172
Thank you. You speak for me too. n/t	Catherina	Dec 2012	#187
We are not going to have Congress on our side any time in the foreseeable future	gollygee	Dec 2012	#94
Maybe not in 2 years	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#97
I doubt it	gollygee	Dec 2012	#103
It may take 10 years	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#112
In 10 years	gollygee	Dec 2012	#119
That is supposition	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#128
Current reality is that we can't undo social security cuts and won't be able to in the foreseeable	gollygee	Dec 2012	#129
So your saying that GOP	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#148
Probably not forever	gollygee	Dec 2012	#151
Agreed. The intention disinfo program is harmful. n/t	lumberjack_jeff	Dec 2012	#96
I think it's the difference between SNAP receiving cuts in the program	Puzzledtraveller	Dec 2012	#61
But there is still a $7.7 Billion cut to Food Stamps	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#73
Wrong, wrong, and wrong	Report1212	Dec 2012	#42
They are not unrelated.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#44
Articles still missing the mark	Report1212	Dec 2012	#52
They are part of the sequester	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#54
According to this link, SNAP (food stamps) are NOT affected by the sequester.	yodermon	Dec 2012	#59
Thank you for the link	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#83
+1 nt	ProudProgressiveNow	Dec 2012	#174
but but my friend got a letter..	frylock	Dec 2012	#197
Stop spreading disinformation	MadHound	Dec 2012	#63
MadHound	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#75
That's not the whole story.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#90
Stop spreading your disinformation,	MadHound	Dec 2012	#116
+1000 nt	ProudProgressiveNow	Dec 2012	#175
So old people are to be the sacrificial lambs. Gotcha. That's the new meme around here.	forestpath	Dec 2012	#70
So the poor and unemployed or sacrificial lambs instead.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#81
No one should be a sacrificial lamb	gollygee	Dec 2012	#100
Why?	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#106
The Republicans won't vote en masse to end food stamps	gollygee	Dec 2012	#108
That is not logical	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#114
You must not know much about Congress	gollygee	Dec 2012	#121
Yes it does.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#152
You are the ones insisting it is either/or. One day everyone will go over Obama's cliff.	forestpath	Dec 2012	#102
I see more cruelty	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#110
The cruelty is using seniors for scapegoats. That's what you and President Obama are doing.	forestpath	Dec 2012	#124
So it is better to make the poor and needy scapegoats now.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#150
True, why is anyone even putting that on the table?	treestar	Dec 2012	#74
Because	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#82
Saving Social Security is	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#98
So the hell with the poor and needy now?	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#104
A chained CPI is immediate once in place	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#113
And it can always be reversed	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#117
It'll NEVER be reversed	durablend	Dec 2012	#143
It's not reality to say	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#161
Yes it is immediate.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#125
Their has to be a political will for that to be undone	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#137
But we can create that political will	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#163
What a load of nonsense	Autumn	Dec 2012	#76
Not nonsense	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#95
This is the same phony 'hide behind the poor' bullshit we heard two years ago, when	Marr	Dec 2012	#80
Not phoney if you're dependant on Food Stamps or	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#88
Food stamp are shielded. If you run out of benefits you qualify for help	Autumn	Dec 2012	#118
So it is OK	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#155
So it's okay that the poor and needy suffer so you can win an ideological victory?	Autumn	Dec 2012	#165
When did I ever advocate for tax cuts for the wealthy.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#181
If you want this deal, which does nothing but harm the needy, yeah this deal is to	Autumn	Dec 2012	#188
Going off the fiscal cliff harms the needy	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#189
I'm done, have a nice holiday n/t	Autumn	Dec 2012	#190
How Dare You...	KharmaTrain	Dec 2012	#89
Sequestration doesn't work in the manner you describe	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#92
The Debt Ceiling Is Separate From Sequestration...	KharmaTrain	Dec 2012	#136
That is the point	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#142
The "Cliff" Is...The Debt Ceiling Isn't...	KharmaTrain	Dec 2012	#154
The debt ceiling can be dealt with	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#162
Confusion Is The Politician's Best Friend...	KharmaTrain	Dec 2012	#192
I think that based on what happened last	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#196
The Last Time...	KharmaTrain	Dec 2012	#200
LOL nt	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#93
And that right there is the response...	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#105
Tell it! But you have to assume that everyone who's carping is really a "liberal" or "progressive".	Tarheel_Dem	Dec 2012	#109
Ah... and here come the folks	whatchamacallit	Dec 2012	#127
The President is Good Light.	Cha	Dec 2012	#220
As msanthrope would quip: "you Better Believe It!"	great white snark	Dec 2012	#177
!!!!	Tarheel_Dem	Dec 2012	#213
absolute bullshit	Enrique	Dec 2012	#115
Nonsense.	99Forever	Dec 2012	#146
being lied to?	Enrique	Dec 2012	#153
Maybe..	99Forever	Dec 2012	#158
by this logic there are no limits on GOP power	Enrique	Dec 2012	#156
No saying the chained CPI	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#167
How will this affect unemployment?	drm604	Dec 2012	#160
I'm not certain about this	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#170
I'm concerned most about my immediate benefits; the next few weeks or months.	drm604	Dec 2012	#204
My neighbor ran out of employment benefits 2 weeks ago, She applied for aid	Autumn	Dec 2012	#171
Good for her.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#184
So, what do you propose? That we go along with the Democrats caving..again?	Tierra_y_Libertad	Dec 2012	#166
Compromise is not caving.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#180
It is when you when you you give up the most.	Tierra_y_Libertad	Dec 2012	#183
How is it the most?	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#186
Chained CPI, cutting more from SS than the military.	Tierra_y_Libertad	Dec 2012	#191
That's still not giving up the most.	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#207
If it's not so important why are the Republicans and 3rd Way so focused on it?	Tierra_y_Libertad	Dec 2012	#210
There are deals that would be worse for more people over the long run, in order to avoid the "cliff"	MNBrewer	Dec 2012	#168
This old chestnut gets trotted out every time	whatchamacallit	Dec 2012	#176
No that's the old chestnut	One of the 99	Dec 2012	#179
Some would rather score a victory for their "team" than do something to help those in need.	NYC Liberal	Dec 2012	#195
No that is not true at all	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#198
I don't speak to any person in particular. However, there is a faction of the population --	NYC Liberal	Dec 2012	#199
We know the Tea party wants total victory	Harmony Blue	Dec 2012	#203
Neither is being endlessly blackmailed.	aquart	Dec 2012	#201
We need new much more co-operative ways to live and work in order to maximize tax-funded resources	patrice	Dec 2012	#202
So, the choices are..	Teamster Jeff	Dec 2012	#209
but	MNBrewer	Dec 2012	#212
Food stamps are exempt.	HiPointDem	Dec 2012	#218