HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I propose a coalition bet...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 11:59 AM

I propose a coalition between the Progressive Caucus and the Tea Party ...

to get us over this fiscal cliff issue.

The deal is simple: Two year extension of the debt limit. Two years of no tax increases. Two years of no spending cuts.

Sure, I would love for taxes to go up on the rich. But we will have to give them *something* in order to get a deal. And I would rather give them this than give them cuts to Social Security or Medicare.

It is a myth that the deficit is a serious problem right now. It will drop as the economy improves. Spending cuts and tax increases, if done too quickly, could actually shortchange the economic recovery and end up making the deficit worse rather than better.

All the thinking up to this point has revolved around getting an agreement between blue dog dems and establishment pubs. They have had their chance, and they have failed.

Maybe the progressives and tea partiers can do better.

16 replies, 1009 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

Response to dawg (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:09 PM

1. They'd never take that deal.

They want to use the debt limit to demand spending cuts or at least as a mechanism to shut down the government. Extend it for 2 years and they can't use it prior to the next election cycle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:16 PM

2. You really think spending cuts are more important to them ...

than their rich guy tax cuts? I think not.

And we've got them dead to rights on taxes, right now. Those tax cuts are ancient history unless they give us something worthwhile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 03:56 PM

7. The Tea Party is hell bent on smaller government.

That means cut taxes AND cut spending.

Your proposal leaves taxes where they are (they want them reduced more) and spending stays the same (they hate that).

And you take away the only leverage they have, the debt ceiling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 01:53 PM

3. Can't keep putting off what needs to be done now.

 

They will have the same threat two years from now; while nibbling little by little at entitlements and continuing the main contributer to debt, Bush tax cut to just roll on. When the Gop gets the presidency back, they will go all out for real cuts to all the Dems have done to create safety net, the last century.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:30 PM

6. But what needs to be done now is impossible with Republicans in control of the House.

If the GOP wants to gut Social Security and Medicare if they ever take back the Presidency, they will have the voters to answer to. I see no reason to go ahead and meet them halfway with that now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #6)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 05:07 PM

13. The TP is only one third about 80 of Gop house they still have 160 we can deal with

 

The problem with that is, it's not enough to get to 218 votes to pass without Dem votes. If Boehner would let vote happen with 200 Dems and 19 Repigs to bring it over the 218; they would be mad because it would look like a Dem win and Gop loss, so bye bye speakership. If he were more concerned with the country instead of speakership he would bring it up to vote.
As far as the gerrymandered house is concerned, it will be a while before Dems see majority again, unless people get sick of the uncompromising TP and get rid of them. Total house votes were in favor of Dems by one and a half million votes.
So house set to be in Gop control for a few more cycles, we can't afford to wait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 01:56 PM

4. The deficit is more important than taxes, spending, SS and Medicare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RB TexLa (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:27 PM

5. What on Earth makes you think that?

You do realize, don't you, that treasuries are at historically low rates right now. We can borrow money at less than our long-term growth rate, and by doing so, make investments that will make us all richer in the long run.

Money and debt are accounting fictions. The true wealth of a nation is the goods and services produced by its people. When our economy forces people to sit at home producing nothing, because there are no jobs, that is a loss that can never be recovered. If, by running a deficit, we can enable more people to produce more goods and services, we are richer as a society as a result.

The deficit is just a distraction. It never seems to matter when tax cuts are concerned, but it is always an issue whenever someone wants to help people in need.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RB TexLa (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:29 PM

10. Right Wing Talking Point. And so not true.

Governments do not operate like a person trying to balance a household budget or even a business, there is no analogy to be made.

The future deficits in the budget can be brought under control by higher deficit spending now to stimulate economic activity.

It is counter-intuitive, that's why so many on the Right can't grasp it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:11 PM

8. So that is basically the deal Obama did with Boehner 18 months ago

Were the Tea Partiers happy with it? No. Neither were Progressives: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/01/debt-ceiling-deal-progressives-tea-party_n_914666.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to muriel_volestrangler (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:19 PM

9. Neither party is happy with a true compromise.

It bought us enough time for the recovery to progress and the President to win re-election. What I suggest would buy us two more years of sanity and recovery. Hopefully, we could use those two years to elect more Democrats so we can eventually get out tax revenues back in line with historical norms, but until then, tax cuts are the only things we should be willing to compromise over. Our safety net is already far insufficient for a first world country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:52 PM

11. But I can't see why you think the Progressives and Tea Partiers would be the ones

who would want this. Both were the factions of their parties that were unhappy with a similar deal last time. The Tea Partiers in particular have always run on "reduce the deficit", but your plan would keep the deficit higher for longer than any other proposal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Original post)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 04:54 PM

12. aka. kick the can down the road.

Another excuse not to arrive at solutions for anything let alone a starting point for the future.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skidmore (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 06:24 PM

14. The status quo is better than any alternative they will agree to.

If the choice is between a bad deal and kicking the can down the road, I say kick the can.

This is no time for austerity anyway. Too many people are out of work already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 06:39 PM

15. Personally I prefer to force people to sit down and resolve some thing for a change. This perpetual

living in a state of uncertainty and utter bullshit is not good for people or the nation either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skidmore (Reply #15)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 07:02 PM

16. It's never resolved.

Every two years there is an election, and then everything is back on the table again. It is the nature of our Republic.

Right now, if the choice is between the status quo and austerity, I prefer the status quo. When unemployment is down below 6% I'll feel differently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread