HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Obama has a lot more poli...

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:13 PM

Obama has a lot more political capital than the Republicans now....so WTF is he doing?!

Obama was re-elected one month ago by a solid margin. He displayed great leadership traits and skills in the response to Hurricane Sandy and, more recently, to the horrific shootings in Connecticut. His speech after the shootings really moved me, as I am sure it did many of you.

Furthermore, Obama is more popular now than he has been in three years-his latest approval ratings are in the high 50s (56 percent average according to the latest Gallup tracking poll, of Monday through Wednesday), a lot of which could very well be due to his empathetic, emotionally powerful response to the Sandy Hook shootings. Regardless, he is getting more popular now.

Finally, and most importantly, the GOP is not popular with the general public, and neither are GOP policies. In fact, 53 percent of Americans, as of a CNN poll released today, state that the GOP is too extreme, and that they should give more in the "fiscal cliff" negotiations than President Obama. Fewer than one third of Americans trust the GOP more than Preisdent Obama in dealing with the "cliff."

It's clear that Obama has more political popularity than the Republican Party. So why, after all the promises he made to his base of supporters, to the American people, to us, is he doing damn near his best to piss it all away? What's in it for him?

Obama's a smart guy. He should know that his party will, in all likelihood, suffer a bloodbath in the 2014 elections, if he goes down this path. He should know that his supporters, Democrats in general, and liberals/progressives are currently in an uproar over the disaster that is his Social Security proposal. More importantly, he should care.

I guess he figures that he got his two terms, so he doesn't feel like he owes us anything...not even honesty about his plans to gut the safety net for millions of Americans. Not even honesty about his lack of spine on the issue of tax cuts for the wealthy. Not even honesty about his indifference to America's way-too-huge military-industrial-corporate welfare complex. Not even that....

I wish I could say that I still trust Obama. I really do...



46 replies, 2360 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 46 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama has a lot more political capital than the Republicans now....so WTF is he doing?! (Original post)
YoungDemCA Dec 2012 OP
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #1
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #7
MotherPetrie Dec 2012 #19
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #23
hfojvt Dec 2012 #39
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #42
hfojvt Dec 2012 #44
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #46
byeya Dec 2012 #2
DJ13 Dec 2012 #3
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #4
One of the 99 Dec 2012 #6
mac56 Dec 2012 #28
amandabeech Dec 2012 #41
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #43
spanone Dec 2012 #5
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #9
randome Dec 2012 #11
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #15
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #13
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #16
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #18
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #20
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #26
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #32
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #35
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #8
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #17
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #21
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #27
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #33
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #36
mythology Dec 2012 #37
99th_Monkey Dec 2012 #38
forestpath Dec 2012 #10
Uncle Joe Dec 2012 #12
liberalmuse Dec 2012 #14
Eddie Haskell Dec 2012 #22
pnwmom Dec 2012 #24
pnwmom Dec 2012 #25
Iggy Dec 2012 #29
NYC Liberal Dec 2012 #30
Iggy Dec 2012 #31
0rganism Dec 2012 #34
OmahaBlueDog Dec 2012 #40
closeupready Dec 2012 #45

Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:16 PM

1. He's playing interdimensional chess! He's faking the Repugs OUT! He's having FUN with the Repugs!

 

Don't worry! He KNOWS the Repugs won't take his offer!

He'll make the Repugs LOOK bad!

(Did I leave anything out?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:27 PM

7. Only the ...

3 million plus, that will lose their U/C benefits when we go over the cliff ... And the couple million working poor with children that will have to choose between: 1) reaching deep into their pockets to pay for child day/after-school care; 2) leaving their kid at home or just maybe give them a key; 3) Not working, as the day/after school subsidies end ... And the couple million of homeless and near homeless folks that rely on federally funded programs.

Besides that ... Nope, you didn't miss a thing!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:57 PM

19. No, those aren't included. Screwing current and future SS recipients for all time, however, is.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:37 PM

23. How do you figure ...

you can exclude them? They are the ones harmed, on January 15th, if not before, if we go over the cliff. And in the case of U/C, their going to be hurt a heck of a lot more than a 10% (Manny's figure) decrease in the COLA increase over 20 years. Don't you think?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:48 AM

39. yep and the best way to help them

is by extending most of the Bush tax cuts.

And why not? The Bush tax cuts always were about helping the little people.

"The unemployment number is now at 6 percent, which should serve as a clear signal to the United States Congress we need a bold economic recovery package so people can find work. (Applause.) That 6-percent number should say loud and clear to members of both political parties in the United States Congress, we need robust tax relief so our fellow citizens can find a job. (Applause.)" May 6, 2003

"But in spite of the good news, people are looking for work. And as long as our fellow citizens are looking for work, we must act. So long as families are struggling to pay the bills, we must act here in America. So long as small businesses are hesitant to expand and to create new jobs, we must act. And the "we" in this case is the United States Congress." May 12, 2003

"Yes, I'm worried about the deficit. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the fellow looking for work. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the single mom who's worried about putting food on the table for her children, so she could find work. And that's where the focus of this administration is going to be." May 12, 2003


Somebody please think about the poor and pass (er extend) the Bush tax cuts.

And I know we can count on the President to get us an AWESOME deal. A whole $5 billion in extended unemployment benefits for a mere $600 billion in tax cuts for the rich.

They won't even realize how badly they are getting outplayed because they will foolishly believe that 600 is bigger than 5.

The fools.

Checkmate Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hfojvt (Reply #39)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:18 AM

42. With all due respect ...

what is more important to you ... ensuring that those at the bottom are protected or getting more money from the wealthy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #42)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 02:30 PM

44. the question is - what is more important to the politician

I just showed you one example of a lying piece of excrement, who claimed to care about the poor, and that is why he was passing a huge tax cut for the rich.

I did not buy that argument when Bush made it.

I don't buy that argument now when Obama or defenders of Obama make it.

Don't ever expect me to believe that the only way we can help the poor is by giving massive amounts of money to the rich. Or that we are only giving massive amounts of money to the rich in order to help the poor.

I believe that massive inequality is a threat to all of us, especially the poor. So increasing that inequality is no way to help the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hfojvt (Reply #44)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 03:15 PM

46. I would agree ...

But in a divided democratic republic such as our's, where one half doesn't care about the poor, and only works to give to the rich, sometimes to get what you want, you have to give them some of what they want. T

And pretending otherwise doesn't change that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:17 PM

2. He's channelling his inner Nelson Rockefeller

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:19 PM

3. I'm really starting to think he actually likes people like Boehner

more than he likes most of his fellow Dems in Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:20 PM

4. He's not ...

It's clear that Obama has more political popularity than the Republican Party. So why, after all the promises he made to his base of supporters, to the American people, to us, is he doing damn near his best to piss it all away?


Pi$$ing away anything.

I see him as attempting to strike a deal that'll stop us from going over the cliff because he's a smart guy that realizes that going over the cliff will hurt the long-term unemployed, the working poor with kids, and the homeless and near-homeless, on January 15th, if not sooner.

Failing a deal, he's positioning ALL Democratic candidates with ready campaign points for 2014.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:24 PM

6. Well said nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:52 PM

28. this

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:35 AM

41. Then let's see him propose cuts for all those groups, too.

Last edited Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:13 PM - Edit history (1)

Oh, I see. He's not.

He's only ready to propose cuts that would hurt low-income elderly, who are mostly women, BTW.

I'm not OK with cuts for your favored group, but it's not okay for you to cut mine.

On Edit: last "not"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to amandabeech (Reply #41)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:23 AM

43. WHAT?

or better, WTF!

Propose cuts to U/C, homeless and the working poor programming????

I'm done!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:21 PM

5. and what do you want him to do? he has an adversary that keeps changing the goalposts....

but it's easier to blame the President, i guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:31 PM

9. Go over the fucking cliff. i.e. DO NOTHING

That would be far better than what Obama is doing now.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022023158

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:32 PM

11. Are you an economist? How do you know that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #11)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:46 PM

15. Krugman, Sanders and DeFazio

I trust these three people's combined and considered judgement on the issue,
and they all pretty much agree with going over the cliff, rather than caving on
Social Security or Medicare cuts..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09/paul-krugman-obama-should_n_2099801.html
https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/11/12-11
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021805535

Is that clear enough for you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:44 PM

13. Not for the ...

3 million plus, that will lose their U/C benefits when we go over the cliff ... And the couple million working poor with children that will have to choose between: 1) reaching deep into their pockets to pay for child day/after-school care; 2) leaving their kid at home or just maybe give them a key; 3) Not working, as the day/after school subsidies end ... And the couple million of homeless and near homeless folks that rely on federally funded programs.

Yes, the chained CPI might harm the elderly, disabled and veterans ... unless they are exempted or protected; just like the langauge of the proposal said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:48 PM

16. Our 2nd term POTUS and new improved Congress

can clean up the mess after the inauguration,
WITHOUT GIVING AWAY THE FUCKING STORE IN THE MEANTIME.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:56 PM

18. You do realize ...

Democrats do not control the House, right?

And, President Obama is NOT giving away the store ... not by a long shoot; but he is attempting to protect those that will be hurt, the most and the most immediately.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #18)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:02 PM

20. This is what I realize

That I trust these three people's combined and considered judgement on the issue,
more than I trust Obama at this point or his apologists. Krugman, Defazio and Sanders
ALL pretty much agree that going over the cliff is far better than caving on Social Security
or Medicare cuts..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09/paul-krugman-obama-should_n_2099801.html
https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/11/12-11
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021805535

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:42 PM

26. Okay ...

to hell with the homeless (near homeless) the unemployed, the working poor. Must protect retirees, the disabled and veterans (oh yeah and me) from a 10% (manny's figure) decrease in the COLA increase over 20 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:34 PM

32. I didn't say that, you did.

Here's what I AM saying:

These things can be dealt with, within the context of a whole new ball game:
i.e. not a lame duck session ... but with new players, such as Eliz Warren, et.
al. and more Democratic control than now. in Jan maybe we can use money
the Cliff cuts from the defense budget to restore funding to these programs you
mention, or some such .. the point being that in Jan we have more votes to
get the BEST deal possible, not this lame-ass deal that we'll be stuck with ad
infinitum.

Also, in Jan we maybe could raise cap on SS, rather than employ punitive cuts
by covertly gaming the CPI calculation to extort money from Seniors, leaving
them to sink ever-deeper into poverty.

Basically, I believe Sanders, DeFazio and Krugman on these issues: and they are
ALL saying the same thing: go over the cliff .. the cliff is bullshit designed to
scare people into doing irrational things, and much of it is not binding on the
new session, with more Progressive & Democratic votes in both houses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:01 PM

35. I know ...

you didn't ... But advocating "standing firm" and going over the cliff has that effect!

These things can be dealt with, within the context of a whole new ball game:
i.e. not a lame duck session ... but with new players, such as Eliz Warren, et.
al. and more Democratic control than now.get the BEST deal possible, not this lame-ass deal that we'll be stuck with ad
infinitum.
/div]

But we DON'T have controil of the House ... we have had control of the Senate for President Obama's entire term. Nothing has changed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:29 PM

8. PRECISELY!! The GOP is a laughing stock, ideologically bankrupt & highly unpopular

I can no longer blame the GOP or Grover Norquist for wanting to gut Social Security and Medicare, etc.
That's just what these assholes do, in their sleep even.

But now we have a hugely popular DEMOCRATIC sitting President, with 100 times the "mandate" than
Bush ever had, acting like he lost the fucking election, like he has to "appease" the Devil himself, for
no apparent reason, unless that's what he intended to do all along: SELL OUT THE POOR AND MIDDLE
CLASS.

PS - You might appreciate my OP on this subject as well,
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022041562

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:51 PM

17. Or, he could be ...

attempting to strike a deal that'll stop us from going over the cliff because he's a smart guy that realizes that going over the cliff will hurt the long-term unemployed, the working poor with kids, and the homeless and near-homeless, on January 15th, if not sooner.

Failing a deal, he's positioning ALL Democratic candidates with ready campaign points for 2014.

I mean ... The unjaudiced eye would see that this is how he has operated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:08 PM

21. Time will tell

but if Obama supports "chained CPI" and it gets enacted as law,
he is serving Wall St. not the middle class or the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:51 PM

27. I think ...

The difference is, President Obama recognizes that real vulnerable people WILL be hurt on January 15th, if not before, if we go over the cliff. He also recognizes that the language included in his rumored proposal protects vulnerable the elderly, disabled and veterans. Finally, President Obama recognizes that Congress sets the CPI formula ... They can easily (if anything is easy in politics today) build on the CPI-E model, to protect all vulnerable SS recipients.

I'm really starting to believe folks are concerned more about THEIR COLA increases; rather than, those they purport to be concerned with. But that's just my cynicism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:58 PM

33. What this comes down to for me, is that I trust Sanders, DeFazio & Krugman on this

and they're all saying the same thing: to go over the cliff .. and they're not the only
ones ... saying that if we take this "Grand Sell-Out" that we'll regret the damage the
this CPI scam would do to SS recipients, and by-the-way ...if my memory serves me
right, they reference some tax cut for the wealthiest assholes included in there too, or
their cut is way less than it would be if we went over the cliff? Or it seems
that's what I saw in the nooz anyway.

These three people combined, know way more about this shit than I ever will, and I believe
they are all defenders of the defenseless, helpers of the helpless, exceptionally decent & honest
people in performing their respective duties in life. Granted, they ARE "three white guys".
Never-the-less, I admit to trusting these guys way more than some random encounter on a
political website, especially with no sources referenced, etc.

Here are my sources:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/09/paul-krugman-obama-should_n_2099801.html
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/11/12-11
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021805535

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:58 PM

36. I agree ...

that all of them have forgotten more than I will ever know about this stuff ... But it hasn't escaped me that while they talk about the whole, they have yet to mention those that make up the most vulnerable of the parts that make up the whole. IOW, they seem to be defending the establishment whole, at the expense of the vulnerable bottom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99th_Monkey (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 11:11 PM

37. They may care, but not one of them will be put at risk by going over the cliff

And saying that going over the cliff is the better choice in the long term doesn't mean that it won't have some really negative impacts in the short term, particularly on those who are on the lower end of the economic ladder.

This is one of those instances where I think all of the possible outcomes suck, and it really hurts that Democrats have to negotiate with Republicans who not only won't negotiate in good faith, but also make up their own "facts".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mythology (Reply #37)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:35 AM

38. Then I guess "they" have already won

"they" have us, who basically agree that the poorest and most vulnerable should be highest
priority, "they" have US bickering over the crumbs, over which cuts are worse for whom, etc.

This is why people get so damn turned off to politics, it's always "heads I win, tails you lose",
or almost always, the 1% sits behind the fray, laughing their asses off all the way to the bank.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:32 PM

10. He liked the sound of Romneyhood so much that he embraced it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:32 PM

12. Using his political capital to screw the people; most likely to forgive him and the Democratic Party.

Thanks for the thread, YoungDemCA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 06:46 PM

14. He's doing what he's always done.

And while I love this Prez and fully support him, I get frustrated. There is a reason he was initially my 4th or 5th choice back in 2007. He plays MUCH too nice with the ratty Repubs. I want him to kick some ballz!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 07:21 PM

22. I believe Obama has an inferiority complex or some sort of personality disorder.

He seems to need approval from everyone; even those attempting to lynch him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eddie Haskell (Reply #22)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:39 PM

24. Yeah, he's got a personality disorder: he's human.

Therefore, he's flawed.

You know nothing about personality disorders if you think he's showing evidence of one. Maybe you think he should be a dictator. Since he can't be, he has no choice but to work with the Rethugs in the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:40 PM

25. The Republicans are failing, so far. What's your problem with Obama tonight? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 08:58 PM

29. What is He Doing??

 

why, CAVING to the conservative wealthy class, of course-- just like he did on:

1.) no single payer health care.
2.) no EFCA
3.) no raise in the min wage
4.) no closure of Guantanamo
5.) Extending the bush tax cuts in the first place
6.) No punishment for torture committed during previous admin
7.) No punishment for irresponsible, greedy banksters that wrecked our economy

and so on.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggy (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:02 PM

30. Because Republicans, conservadems, and Congress have NOTHING to do with any of that.

The Senate voted 90-6 to prohibit the transfer of detainees from Gitmo. Even Sanders voted for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC Liberal (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 09:09 PM

31. Agreed...

 

if you read my posts, you'll see I continually put blame for the giant farce our nation has become where it belongs: on Congress. my point earlier is about Obama's allegedly solid "negotiating skills" related to the current fiasco.

His agreeing to do anything to so called "entitlements" without first insisting on a significant, serious cut to our bloated military budget, without agreeing to fully disengage from the graveyard of empires (Afghanistan) is all the proof I need Obama is not doing much negotiating here.. it's mostly theater and it's about caving to the wealthy class actually running the Circus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2012, 10:01 PM

34. looks like he's "winning", whatever that means

it's been so long since any Democrat's tried it, I have a hard time believing it sometimes too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:18 AM

40. He's essentially telling them to put up or shut up

He's gotten the concession on taxing the wealthy; it's now just a matter of settling on a figure between 400K and 1M. ..and now he's offered painful entitlement cuts.

Meanwhile, Boehner had tried to say "It won't play -- we'll pass a 'plan B', and if it fails and we go over the cliff -- it's your fault. " The problem -- no one's buying. And it's unlikely Obama's going to offer more than he's offering now. The new congress is more ideologically to his liking. Even if the house is still GOP controlled, it's by a closer margin and it'll be somewhat less strident.

My bet is that we "go over the cliff" but settle this prior to the end of 1Q13.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/14/investing/buffett-fiscal-cliff/index.html

While it's not ideal, the founder of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA, Fortune 500) thinks that President Obama must be willing to keep pushing for higher taxes on the wealthy, even if it triggers the fiscal cliff that would lead to the automatic onset of tax increases and spending cuts on Jan.1.

The U.S. economy, he said, can weather it for a month or two. "We're not going to permanently cripple ourselves," Buffett told CNN's Poppy Harlow in an exclusive interview at Berkshire Hathaway's Omaha headquarters Wednesday.

Buffett shrugged off the Congressional Budget Office's warnings that failure to address the fiscal cliff by Dec. 31 could lead to a recession. "We have a very resilient economy," he said. "The fact that can't get along for the month of January is not going to torpedo the economy."

He also advocated a twist on the so-called Buffett Rule, which would force anyone who makes more than $1 million per year to pay a minimum tax rate of 30%.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YoungDemCA (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 02:32 PM

45. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread