Wed Jan 2, 2013, 12:29 PM
ProSense (98,243 posts)
The fiscal cliff negotiations, in one chart
Zero discretionary (originally $250 billion) or mandatory cuts (originally $350 billion)
The fiscal cliff negotiations, in one chart http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/02/the-fiscal-cliff-negotiations-in-one-chart/
|
9 replies, 561 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
| Author | Time | Post | |
| ProSense | Jan 2013 | OP | |
| maxsolomon | Jan 2013 | #1 | |
| ProSense | Jan 2013 | #2 | |
| maxsolomon | Jan 2013 | #4 | |
| No Compromise | Jan 2013 | #3 | |
| Eddie Haskell | Jan 2013 | #5 | |
| ProSense | Jan 2013 | #7 | |
| Eddie Haskell | Jan 2013 | #8 | |
| Scurrilous | Jan 2013 | #6 | |
| WillyT | Jan 2013 | #9 |
Response to ProSense (Original post)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 12:38 PM
maxsolomon (11,849 posts)
1. Kicking the can down the road
|
And 2 more years of another dysfunctional know-nothing congress, with a balanced budget disappearing over the horizon.
Feeling cynical today. |
Response to maxsolomon (Reply #1)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 12:46 PM
ProSense (98,243 posts)
2. I don't support
|
"And 2 more years of another dysfunctional know-nothing congress, with a balanced budget disappearing over the horizon."
...a balanced budget. Still, anyone concerned with deficits should strongly push for four things: 1) Cutting defense and ending the war. Growth and increasing revenues will go a long way to reducing the deficit. |
Response to ProSense (Reply #2)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:27 PM
maxsolomon (11,849 posts)
4. I support all that
|
But there is little will, if any, to even address the elephant in the room of Defense Spending. Hell, Willard Romney wanted to INCREASE it, and he wasn't laughed out of the race.
|
Response to ProSense (Original post)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 12:59 PM
No Compromise (373 posts)
3. seems to me we need to raise taxes much higher than they were before the wars
|
to pay off the wars and the tax cuts during new Big Government programs like Homeland Security
What we have been talking about, the difference between what 1 %ers and 2%ers will have to pay....is absurd. The idea we are just talking about ending the Bush tax cuts, but still pretending they didn't cause the problem in the first place.... we are in serious bizzaro land in the US. |
Response to ProSense (Original post)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 01:51 PM
Eddie Haskell (1,147 posts)
5. We got plan B and people in the DU are cheering.
|
Last edited Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:36 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to Eddie Haskell (Reply #5)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 04:31 PM
ProSense (98,243 posts)
7. No,
|
"We got plan B and people in the DU are cheering."
...Plan B has less tax revenue and nearly $120 billion in nasty cuts to social programs. House Republicans Cut Food Stamps, Obamacare, And Wall Street Oversight In Ill-Fated ‘Plan B’ http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/12/20/1367271/gop-spending-cuts-added-plan-b/ We got tax revenues and no cuts: From the White House: 7 Things You Need to Know About the Deal http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022118640 No spending cuts alone is worth cheering. |
Response to ProSense (Reply #7)
Wed Jan 2, 2013, 05:42 PM
Eddie Haskell (1,147 posts)
8. We'll see what happens in two months.
|
The WH list is a bunch of half-truths and misrepresentations. Without any deal, taxes on the rich would have gone much higher. The spending cuts were just pushed down the road.
|

