Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Krugman: Rumors of a Deal (WTF?) - updated [View all]
Rumors of a Deal
It sounds as if Ezra Klein is hearing more or less the same things Im hearing...Unlike what wed heard from Republicans before, this contains stuff that Obama cant get just by letting us go over the cliff: more revenue than he could get just from tax-cut expiration, unemployment and infrastructure too. But it has a cost, those benefit cuts.
Those cuts are a very bad thing, although there will supposedly be some protection for low-income seniors. But the cuts are not nearly as bad as raising the Medicare age, for two reasons: the structure of the program remains intact, and unlike the Medicare age thing, they wouldnt be totally devastating for hundreds of thousands of people, just somewhat painful for a much larger group. Oh, and raising the Medicare age would kill people; this benefit cut, not so much.
The point is that we shouldnt be doing benefit cuts at all; but if benefit cuts are the price of a deal that is better than no deal, much better that they involve the CPI adjustment than the retirement age.
But is this rumored deal better than no deal? Im on the edge. Its not clear that going over the cliff would yield something better; on the other hand, those benefit cuts are really bad, and you hate to see a Democratic president lending his name to something like that. There is a case for refusing to make this deal, and hoping for a popular backlash against the GOP that transforms the whole debate; but theres also an argument that this might not work.
- more -
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/rumors-of-a-deal
It sounds as if Ezra Klein is hearing more or less the same things Im hearing...Unlike what wed heard from Republicans before, this contains stuff that Obama cant get just by letting us go over the cliff: more revenue than he could get just from tax-cut expiration, unemployment and infrastructure too. But it has a cost, those benefit cuts.
Those cuts are a very bad thing, although there will supposedly be some protection for low-income seniors. But the cuts are not nearly as bad as raising the Medicare age, for two reasons: the structure of the program remains intact, and unlike the Medicare age thing, they wouldnt be totally devastating for hundreds of thousands of people, just somewhat painful for a much larger group. Oh, and raising the Medicare age would kill people; this benefit cut, not so much.
The point is that we shouldnt be doing benefit cuts at all; but if benefit cuts are the price of a deal that is better than no deal, much better that they involve the CPI adjustment than the retirement age.
But is this rumored deal better than no deal? Im on the edge. Its not clear that going over the cliff would yield something better; on the other hand, those benefit cuts are really bad, and you hate to see a Democratic president lending his name to something like that. There is a case for refusing to make this deal, and hoping for a popular backlash against the GOP that transforms the whole debate; but theres also an argument that this might not work.
- more -
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/rumors-of-a-deal
Let me get this straight. The President and Democrats have repeatedly said that Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit.
Raising the age for Medicare, which is a driver of the deficit because it's linked to health care costs, is taken off the table because it's a stupid idea that doesn't save money and will "kill people."
Now there are rumors of a deal involving cuts to Social Security benefits?
What the fuck for? Why is a program that has nothing to do with the deficit being dragged into the negotiations?
Are these people seriously determined to cause seniors pain for the hell of it?
There is stupid, raising the Medicare age, and then there is fucking stupid, this current rumor.
I'm surprised at Krugman's piece after he wrote this:
Krugman: No Deal, Continued
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022013316
Updated to add, we just had a fucking election:
What the millionaires want versus what the voters want
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/07/1162018/-What-the-millionaires-want-versus-what-the-voters-want
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
107 replies, 12512 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (72)
ReplyReply to this post
107 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
a majority of both democratic & republican voters support raising taxes on the rich. if this is
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#55
Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit, assuming even the deficit is important enough
byeya
Dec 2012
#2
+1. if he goes for cuts, that's about it for me and the democratic party, i.e. the republican-lite
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#70
It was said by many on this board that entitlement cuts would be made by the lame duck
plethoro
Dec 2012
#36
If this is true, there are several on DU that should seriously consider self exile.
A Simple Game
Dec 2012
#51
And it's been made abundantly clear in that post that this is JUST A RUMOR.
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2012
#60
you think they can make $400 billion in cuts to medicare & it won't affect recipients? i gotta
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#84
Yes, I do. You're forgetting that we now have the PPACA and a public option on its
BlueCaliDem
Dec 2012
#96
I think obama is much more presidential than bush was and michelle has been one of the best
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#105
if the white house didn't want the terms to be public, i assume they wouldn't have released them.
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#107
it'll eventually be a ticket to the cemetery, because the cuts don't end after 10 years.
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#85
Oh good, so despite two years straight of zero SS COLA, the CPI they used is too lavish?
DJ13
Dec 2012
#6
Actually, the official CPI used for older Americans shows *higher* inflation than what's used now
MannyGoldstein
Dec 2012
#12
What do Robert Reich & Senator Sanders say? Sanders has spoken strongly against CPI, right? Is this
patrice
Dec 2012
#23
you can say so, but right now it stands are $100B from military, $130B from SS, $400B from medical.
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#86
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-boehner-meet-as-debt-talks-intensify/2012/12/17/6b43c24
wilsonbooks
Dec 2012
#41
Manny, if it gets bad they will do something in a few years ASSUMING the economy is doing well.
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#73
And he also said chained CPI is a small price to pay for rest of deal, like no Medicare age increase
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#74
What stimulus money do you even begin to think a new mass transit system there is?
TheKentuckian
Dec 2012
#82
In the end it's up to us to put pressure on congress to say no if this is true.
loyalkydem
Dec 2012
#49
I think we should cut Congress. That would be a HUGE savings, in graft alone.
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#78
Much like the deficit reduction act of 2005...the poor and middle class will have less
adirondacker
Dec 2012
#69
seems like we're doing a hell of a lot of sacrificing while the bankster class's profits just keep
HiPointDem
Dec 2012
#77
No problem. Obama will veto any bill that cuts SS, Medicare, or other social programs.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2012
#90