All the tax cuts need to expire. All of them

[Harmony Blue]

Once they expire and all these doomsday scenarios do not come to fruition, only then as a country we can move forward. The Republicans (not just the extreme rightwingers of the party) are pushing the narrative that the fiscal cliff is a real danger to stability. No, what is a real danger to stability is if the debt continues to grow and revenue isn't coming in.... There are even major networks complicit with pushing this narrative. Look no further than CNBC's coverage of this "fiscal cliff" as if investors must wait on the edge of the cliff in horror of what is on the bottom that awaits them.

The Democrats best arsenal to beat back these false charges is to let all the tax cuts expire. If the Republicans don't want to work out a deal for middle class tax cuts so be it. They will take most of the blame, not Obama and the Democrats. But payroll tax holiday and middle class tax cuts are small beans when you compare to the possible cutting of social programs. If you ask me the short term increase in tax cuts (and decrease in tax credits) is worth it if you disarm the rallying point of many Republicans. That is to cut the social programs.

[dkf]

1. What we need from a deal is a more gradual path towards the old rates.

The problem with the fiscal cliff is the timing raising taxes on a weak economy. Yet we know in the end we need a lot more revenue than a pathetic few percent just from a small segment of the population.

Medicare growth also needs to be stopped to equal growth of the economy. Obviously you cannot keep a very expensive program growing faster than your revenue in perpetuity.

From afar it is easy to see what is needed. What is difficult is getting the American people to realize the day of the free lunch is over.

[Yavin4]

4. Save Medicare by Cutting Defense

Go back to the Clinton tax rates and defense budgets and we'll have enough to save Medicare. Clinton's defense budget was $400 Billion. Today, i'ts $700 Billion, which is ridiculous.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/budget/news/2011/07/06/10041/a-historical-perspective-on-defense-budgets/

[dkf]

5. Then tell Obama to stop getting us into conflicts.

We should be staying out of conflicts, yet look at our language on Syria and Iran and our involvement in Libya.

That kind of threatening language needs firepower to be credible or it will be tested.

We can only cut defense if we decide to be like Canada and stop telling others what they can and cannot do.

[OKNancy]

7. do you support any position of this administration?

curious

[dkf]

13. Obama did a good job getting us out of the original mess, stabilizing the financial system.

[Yavin4]

9. "threatening language" <> "involvement"

Obama is only tangentially involving us in conflicts just like Clinton did in Kosovo. Again, we got involved in Kosovo with a $400 billion budget.

Cut the budget back to $400 billion saves $300 billion a year or 3 trillion over a decade. Couple that with higher rates, and Voila! Medicare is saved.

[dkf]

14. So what happens if the Syrians do use chemical weapons?

[Harmony Blue]

2. Ideally a gradual return to the old rates would be the most optimal

but given the current political climate that isn't feasible. So, this is the best next option, and the most logical.

[rso]

3. tax cuts

I say let the tax cuts expire and have the democrats immediately introduce legislation cutting taxes ONLY for those earning less than $ 250,000. The republicans will have no choice but to go for it or lose even more support from the 98 %.

[Xyzse]

6. I can understand a bit of that...

I mean, in regards to taxes, I'm right there with you.
The other issue however is the Sequestration. People are stuck talking about taxes that they don't seem to talk as much about that other part of the equation.

As far as I care, I rather deal with the details of sequestration and let all the tax cuts expire.

Meaning, let's talk about what is getting cut in the sequestration for now and soften that as much as possible. There just doesn't seem to be a point to go on and on about the Tax Cut expiring issue, that it might be best to just create a different Tax Cut after the end of the year, having in mind that sequestration won't be as bad, and they need to be able to pay for it.

[Avalux]

8. I agree completely. Looking forward to going over the 'cliff'.

It must happen to allow Bush's tax cuts for wealthy to expire. Although I don't think the pain will last long for the middle class, after the first of the year a deal will be made that lets Republicans off the hook, so to speak; they won't have to take responsibility for raising taxes on the wealthy, yet can scream about Obama and Dems bullying them.

[Filibuster Harry]

10. Haven't decided one way or the other on this fiscal cliff scenario. If nothing is done

then it affects all of us -- which may be a good thing; this way congress can "start from scratch" so to speak.
But take another scenario: Do the Rs want to deal after Jan 1st. In addition to large tax increases on the wealthy (dividends at regular rates, losing of exemptions and deductions for the top earners) taxes are raised on everybody including reduction or elimination of credits. And unemployment comp. There are many other issues involved.
Do you think the Rs in the house obstruct? Do you think the Rs in the senate filibuster?

Just a scenario.

[Dawson Leery]

11. At some point, all of the Bush 2001/03 tax cuts will have to expire.

Let the top rates expire NOW. In 2015, once the economy improves, then let the rest of the cuts expire.
Also, the military budget needs to be cut.

[Bake]

12. It's the draconian automatic spending cuts that will put us back into recession.

And most economists agree, from what I've seen. And we don't need a recession just to spite the Rethugs.

Bake