|
|
Can someone tell me what I'm missing? On the Fiscal cliff, I keep hearing (generally ABC news, also some CNN.com) about "compromise" and how the Republicans aren't willing to give, yet the last presidential sound bite I heard was "don't let taxes go up on the middle class, we can talk spending cuts later" and that seems to be the theme. Right now the President wants a tax increase on the wealthy, no tax increase on everyone else, and to punt on spending cuts for future discussions, but the Republicans are the ones refusing the compromise? Exactly what part of this proposal has the Democrats compromising?
|
Yup, Boehner delivered his votes to the table. I look forward to the resolution before the end of the year. Oh wait....
|
Quote:
I believe they've offered to draw & quarter successful people without tarring & feathering as many of them first. |
Quote:
If the last leaked proposal is to be believed, Chained CPI A few hundred billion in discretionary cuts Raising the tax increase level from 250000 to 400000 Lowering overall tax raise from 1.6 trillion to 1.2 trillion Restoring the defense cuts from the sequester |
Quote:
See, the President needs to be saying "here are the spending cuts we've agreed to, now show us the tax increases you are willing to make". Instead he's been saying (at least everywhere I've seen) "raise taxes on the rich, then we'll discuss spending". The above list is the first list of proposed spending cuts I've seen mentioned anywhere. |
I got that from several newspapers. It is out there.
|
Quote:
Please do bear in mind most of these 'handgun' offenses aren't what Americans would consider 'handguns' these are often immitation or air-pistols all of which are counted as 'armed' crimes. For instance any person on private property without permission is trespassing; possession when doing so of even a low-power air weapon with no ammunition makes this the serious crime of armed trespass, subject to heavy penalties. So while there has been a 'rise' in offenses its not really that surprising as many will undoubtably have involved things which might have been legally previously and resulted mainly in a 'slap on the wrist' and education of the offender - ie. its unlikely a poacher using a rifle for hunting without licence etc. would be slapped in prison, however he would undoubtably lose his weapon and get a fine - hence the initial rise in offenses. Finally a paragraph from wikipedia - a 2006 study using autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) statistical analysis found no measurable effect detectable from the 1997 firearms legislation[15] but in subsequent years firearm homicides declined. In 2012 the Home Office reported that, "in 2010/11, firearms were involved in 11,227 recorded offences in England and Wales, the seventh consecutive annual fall".[16] Firearms statistics in England and Wales include airguns and imitations guns, which make up a high proportion of these recorded offences (see under "Firearms crime" below). Gun politics in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia So to summarise - after the new policies were put in place higher offenses were recorded, at least partially as society got used to their new restrictions. Subsequently 7 years of falling firearm related offenses have occurred (despite including imitation weapons and airguns in the statistics). |
Quote:
MV knows the Motherland. |
Quote:
Again, you have to dig for details. But when I watch the morning news and see Obama say things like "extend the tax cuts for the middle class and let's talk spending later", it's not the message he's putting out there. For example: Obama urges smaller ‘fiscal cliff’ deal | The Ticket - Yahoo! News Quote:
That's the kind of stuff I see all the time. No mention of spending cuts by him (and I saw video of him saying exactly the above, so it's not a misquote / paraphrase / summarization issue), just "Republicans do this, and I'll talk about the other stuff later". |
People believe the "we'll cut spendings later" part?
|
Quote:
That quote came after the GOP completely rejected the ideas above and failed to pass their plan B. At this point it's the only possible plan that could be passed before Jan. 1. At this point, the only way to keep taxes from going up on everyone is to pass that separately. |
Pardon my incredulousness. So you're saying that the liberal media isn't doing everything in its power to help Obama? Church lady say, isnt that convenient.
Quote:
|
Quote:
Thanks. So if I have the events of the UK down right, the first action was to ban rifles and then the second act was to ban handguns. It was a progressive, "baby-steps" approach to banning firearms in general...essentially "easing" the public into the full ban. We seem to be walking right in your footsteps here as well. We will have a rifle ban in place before 2013 is out (I suspect) and then the big political battle will take place (handguns). I suspect part of the reason so many weapons are being purchased right now is to hope people are "grandfathered" in when the new laws are passed. |
That's paranoia. We'll never have either a rifle or handgun ban as federal law. We likely can't even get a return to the assault weapon ban passed.
|
JPhillips,
Well, I suppose rejection is still possible, but I'll be very surprised if the Dem's don't push for a new ban on rifles before 2013 is out. |
That will never happen. Maybe some backbencher will say something, but it will never have support of the leadership or the President. Even if it did happen the SC would overturn it.
|
I like Obama not playing nice.
WSJ: Obama Threatened Boehner With Using Inauguration, SOTU Address To Blame GOP - Obama - Fox Nation Quote:
|
Quote:
Why? |
Quote:
In simple terms, because the tax cut was temporary and is set to expire on January 1st if the house does not present an extension. The house GOP has been negotiating as if they were in a position of power on an extension and I think the quote from Obama is a reminder that doing nothing triggers the increase in tax revenue (it isn't a compromise or "putting something on the table" -- it is the path that we are on if nothing else happens). |
Yep. He's not really putting it on the table when its just the part of the default that's going to occur if no deal is reached. It just goes back to Clinton era rates (whereas the spending cuts aren't just "going back" to something that was in place).
|
I did not realize tea partiers were "sitting back" on this fight (and I don't think we've heard much since the elections). No Ron Paul, Palin, Bachmann.
- The Washington Post Quote:
|
"Because we don't have a realistic plan and people blame us for being obstructionist, we're going to take our ball and go home. Because next year we can sit up there in the cheap seats and blame everyone for something we didn't want to craft because we sat it out"
SI |
Quote:
I think it would be in bad taste. |
Quote:
More likely that they'll block anything put forward until things go over the cliff .... (personally I think going over the cliff is incredibly likely to happen - I don't think its the end of the world at all, initially the markets will go haywire - but subsequently I expect some things will happen very quickly because of that) |
Not really Obama/government related, but gun related. I was taking the Texas Concealed Handgun License class on Saturday, and there was a lady in the class that didn't know what the 2nd Amendment was. The instructor thought it was a joke at first, but the lady truly didn't know.
|
Quote:
I guess that's a bigger deal in a handgun class but there are a lot of people who probably couldn't name the 3rd, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th and only know the 5th because of court tv shows. SI |
Quote:
I think it's the only way the deal gets done. That way the GOP has coverage as they didn't "raise" rates and has room to work within the parameters of the losing battle they're fighting. Sin of omission rather than sin of commission. Blame GWB for this: if he had worked out a better deal back in the early 2000s rather than having to ram it through via reconciliation then they would be more permanent. But, really, they were tax cuts on money that should have been spent paying off the debt from his 2 pet wars anyway. SI |
T-3.
Listened to Obama's speech and the pundits after. Only a few days to work this out and "this" is only a subset of what needs to be negotiated. I'm thinking the only way we get increased revenues and spending cuts is to go over the cliff. My taxes will go up. But there is a certain satisfaction knowing that everyone's taxes will go up. I know Defense will hurt but I have to believe there is alot of fat and less-than-useful pet projects. We'll likely go back into a recession but if we get increased revenue and significant spending cuts ... wouldn't it be worth it? CNBC showed Mon DOW futures to be off by 300 pts. I'm about 50-30-20 in stock, bonds and cash so feeling okay. |
Sounds like Obama is pressing Reid for a simple up/down vote on extending the cut for those who earn under $250K. This will essentially force each senator to vote for or against "middle class" tax cuts. Who knows if the house would sign off on it, but it is going to lead to upheaval for the GOP either way.
I think Boehner is a goner as the speaker. I think it would be better for everyone if he and Pelosi would just retire. |
No one wants the job.
|
We need to make sure to soak those evil rich people (>250k per year) for tax increases that will decrease the national debt by 6%. The remaining 94% can't be touched with any measure of substantive cuts.
|
Yep as a person whose family isn't close to 250K I still think it is hilarious how easy it is for some people to justify spending other people's money. "What's another 10 grand?" like ten grand doesn't spend the same for someone making 300K a year as it does for them. What if all of the third world countries wanted to impose taxes on those making fifty grand a year because nobody needs that kind off money? And what if it went to some wasteful organization that had intention on cutting back any of the waste? Populism have never been more rampant than this fiscal cliff nonsense. What happened to the panel that was supposed to make these tough decisions last year? Good God the American public gets what it deserves sometimes when they continue to be swindled by these con artists in DC.
|
Maybe it's time for term limits to Congress.
|
I think part of the gridlock is the ease of doing a filibuster nowadays. Also been hearing about the Hastert rule about majority of majority have to agree before being submitted as a bill.
To be honest, I suspect the Democrats would be doing the same if the position was reversed. Weakened Filibuster Reform Plan Unveiled In Congress By John McCain, Carl Levin Quote:
Majority of the majority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Quote:
|
Quote:
Do you think that 99.9% people know all the amendments? |
T-1. At least they are still talking.
- The Washington Post Quote:
|
So basically the Dems want the tax hikes, but seem unwilling to make any decisions on spending reforms/cuts?
|
Quote:
No, not really. Basically, the GOP president and GOP majorities in 2001 and 2003 temporarily cut taxes without making any spending/reform cuts and they are set to expire in 2013 if nothing is done. The Dems are willing to maintain the cuts for all but those making over a certain figure (reportedly only after your first $450K, negotiated up from $250K), but the GOP are trying to attach and/or withhold other essential provisions. The Dems caved under a similar situation in 2010, but now that Obama doesn't have to run again, he isn't willing to "punt" again. |
The Dems are willing to do some cuts, on a bigger deficit deal (that protects some of the things that they want), but the Republicans want the same thing with a smaller revenue package (for example, "Chained CPI" was on the table when a big deficit deal was being discussed, but when a big deal was off the table, the Republicans said "We still want Chained CPI in the package, even though you're not getting as much revenue as you want", and the Democrats are saying "No deal."
The Republicans have the losing hand (and every indication is they still know it) in that a majority of independents and even some Republicans will blame them if there's pain (The fact they couldn't even get "Plan B" to pass is a major embarassment to them), but they are fighting hard to get as much as possible from any deal. |
I'm embarrassed to be from KY and associated with McConnell. He's an idiot, and he's wrong. Not just on this issue. A good friend of mine's wife received teacher if the year in our state, and part of tge deal was she went to Washington to meet Obama, senators, etc. Upon meeti.g McConnell, his first response was......so do you teach in Kentucky?
|
Seeing reports that some framework is now done between biden and McConnell. Cautiously optimistic.
|
Neither side should get what they want. A democrat solution will make the government even worse. A republican solution will do harm to a lot of people. The solution is to do the minimum possible - a series of short-term fixes.
|
|
Quote:
The scariest thing is that considering my naturally left wing viewpoint and Irish heritage I fear some poor sod is having to listen long and hard to me discussing my sisters new job and how my dads legs are feeling these days ;) |
Quote:
They've had something done for weeks. This is all for show. |
Quote:
I concur - this is about both sides making out that they've 'played tough' and got a decent deal for their extremists (who will still moan and complain anyway ;) ). |
Quote:
Yeah, that was my thought as well. I know a lot of people get fired up about it. I'm just thinking that they're wasting a lot of taxpayer money if they want to bother listening to my conversations. |
I seriously doubt they are listening to anything you say unless you have been identified/flagged for some reason. Like making phone calls to England. (I kid, I kid.)
In all seriousness, we would need thousands of trained intel analysts to do that and I don't recall us hiring a bunch of those to handle that sort of workload. |
I'm pretty sure this will get taken care of at least.
Lawmakers push one-year extension of farm bill in bid to avert spike in milk prices | Fox News Quote:
|
There is some strange and interesting drama here about Hillary's collapse and now hospitalization. The National Enquire the day before she was hospitalized said that she had brain cancer and would need to secretly have a battery of tests to confirm the diagnosis. Now, her reps say she has a blood clot, and is being treated with blood thinners. The thing is, if she does have a blod clot stemming from a blow to the head, they would not be using blood thinners. Has the National Enquirer stumbled on another actual scoop?
|
Market up +59 just before Obama's 1:30 speech. Hope its not irrational exuberance.
|
Quote:
It probably is. They are saying he is not announcing a deal. |
Btw, I hope he has tell someone to shut up again. Maybe make them stand in the corner this time.
|
Quote:
That was a riot. |
Quote:
I saw that! Did they ever identify who it was? |
Quote:
Some of the Eastern bloc nations in the 80's and China seem to be good examples of it going past just ease dropping on the "bad guys" but of course that will never happen in America. I was born here so it must be the greatest country in the world with only good intentions of catching bad guys. |
Looks like they'll get a smaller deal through. It will be interesting to see how House Republicans vote. Not sure if Boehner will be able to get half of them to vote for it if it's just the tax increases on incomes over $400k and the spending cuts are just kicked down the road 6-12 months.
|
Quote:
My guess is that the whole agreement with Boehner is that he'll allow the vote, and just enough Republicans will vote yay to get it passed. That way, as many Republicans in the House as possible will be safe from being primaried on this vote alone. |
McCain PO'd at the cheap shots that Obama took. I agree with him, seemed very unprofessional and unnecessary to "tease" the GOP.
|
Quote:
And the Republican's always speak with such reverence about the President. |
Is there anything that doesn't PO McCain these days?
|
Quote:
:D |
Quote:
Out of character for him unlike the GOP ... an unnecessarily antagonistic. |
The Republicans are outraged that Obama won't stand still and let them use him as a punching bag :P
|
I'm kind of surprised that the Republicans are fighting so hard over the income level for which tax cuts should expire. Most wealthy people are making it through capital gains, not ordinary income. Just seems like a silly thing to to tie your ship to. Unless they're using it as a bargaining chip to get something they really want.
|
Quote:
He was way out of line today. He turned that into a pep rally campaign event. |
Quote:
:lol: |
Quote:
How quaint. That went out the door 30 years ago. Or are you just being defensive on this particular president and don't care/remember about the animosities during Reagan/Bush1/Clinton/Bush2 terms? |
Quote:
I saw the basic story yesterday & couldn't help but think back to William Casey. |
Quote:
You mean they are mad that Obama is finally fighting back rather than caving? Poor dears. |
Quote:
His prostate? |
Hopefully they get the milk thing done as that was going to amount to legislative malpractice if they allowed the government to get ripped off like that.
|
Quote:
He's responding to someone wanting the President to be nicer. Are you just being offensive on this particular president? |
Sounds to me like a few Senators looking for a reason not to support a deal are using Obama's comments, which, by the way, is stupid. If it's good enough to vote for, the President's comments shouldn't matter.
Of course, the current GOP is full of thin-skinned babies. |
We are going over the cliff per CNBC
No Vote in the House Tonight; House Republicans to Caucus at 5pm ET Today: Sources Quote:
|
Yup. Boehner can't get anything to pass his crazies in the GOP, so they're going to take their ball and go home. Blame's squarely on them.
|
Quote:
Yeah can't believe those crazies would walk away from an agreement to cut zero spending because the voters all can agree there isn't anything we can cut that the federal government spends money on. |
Quote:
Market up 166+. After hours is up 250+ (as of 4:15pm ET). 24 Hour Stock Market and Forex Data - After-Hours Trading - CNNMoney.com I must be missing something. |
They won't cut spending on shit like SS and Medicare, so any kind of realistic savings is virtually impossible.
|
Quote:
They've actually had two opportunities to lock in entitlement cuts and balked both times. |
Breaking news. It'll be fun to see how the House reacts to it.
Obama, Senate Republicans near agreement on ‘fiscal cliff’ - The Washington Post Quote:
|
Two months sequester extension. Obama blinked.
|
Thank God he never helped buy me a car.
Less in tax increases than if he had done nothing and the two month extension lines up with the debt ceiling. The GOP is going to go 2011 times infinity on this debt ceiling vote and Obama's threats to not negotiate are as hollow as can be. He just conceded on taxes while also giving away the only leverage he had in the debt ceiling talks. |
Two months from now the social programs will be back on the block. Medicare for sure.
|
Quote:
As they should be (along with Defense). |
Quote:
Obama's a shit negotiator. |
It's meaningless, but CNN and other media outlets say this deal will "define who's rich" - i.e, a household income of $450,000 or greater. I don't know what this deal has to do at all with determinations of "rich", but this is what the media's going with. It's interesting to me how its so undesirable to be deemed "rich". I was reading this random article in national geographic traveler magazine about some family who took their kids on a extended world vacation for "education" - they said it cost them $150,000, but they insisted they're not a wealthy family. Why the shame in admitting it? I think if you take your kids on a vacation that costs $1,000 you're fucking loaded on a global scale, and if it's $5,000 you're probably fucking loaded on a U.S scale. $150k - you're clearly at or right near the infamous "1%"(though FWIW, the couple in question was Canadian). But there's so much shame in acknowledging as much. There's weird personal financial dynamics going on. It's not cool to be successful.
|
Lemme see here ... delay spending cuts & raise taxes. And people are bitching about Obama?
I realize that McConnell isn't negotiating from a position of strength so, while I'm unhappy with the terms, I'm not ready to strangle him just yet. If the House goes along with this crap however, those who approve it (at least the version I've seen in the AP itemized summary) can go hang. |
To be fair, it's the 2nd worst deal negotiated in Washington this year. I thought Ariza and Okafor were still viable.
|
Maybe I missed it, but did they identify the target or total $ in spending cuts with details in 2 months?
|
So does it matter if this gets passed in a couple days? what happens then?
I guess they struck a deal but the House left?? |
Theoretically it could be passed in 3 years and backdated tbh. People wouldn't pay more immediately for certain until their quarterly/yearly taxes are due for 2013. Obviously the sequester crap is different. Withholding might change on your paycheck, but you can just change your withholding if you need money in the short term.
|
Quote:
I think many believe the rich got us into this mess, they got bailed out, then they got richer. Doesn't sit well with people. Somebody making 500k is not one of those people but some how the rich have suddenly become anybody making more than you. |
Waiting for the deeper analysis but hey, thanks Reid, McConnell and Biden.
Glad the AMT got fixed. I'm always worried about it when I boot up TurboTax. Why don't the Senate take the first pass at the Debt reduction and have the House rubber stamp it. Senate passes package to avert fiscal cliff; House votes next - CNN.com Quote:
Quote:
|
anyone have a list of who voted no? Just curious to see who voted against it and why
|
Five Republicans and three Democrats voted against the bill: Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Tom Carper (D-Del.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Richard Shelby (R-Ala.).
Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) missed the vote. |
Quote:
Don't we pay them $200,000 a year for life not to miss votes like this? |
Quote:
My inclination whenever I see a landslide 95-5 or 98-2 vote is to hear what the smaller numbers reasons are because generally when the d/r machine is all on board it is bad news. Can't wait until Feb for the same nonsense and midnight negotiations that (after twenty pages of on FOFC) will kick the can down the road again. Obviously the no shows are trying to avoid having a vote on the record which is even worse than those who voted for the bill. |
A little more insight into the +1 year extension into unemployment benefits. If the economy continues to hum I think this should be it.
Unemployment Insurance To Be Extended, $30 Billion Cost Won't Be Offset Quote:
|
Quote:
Thats 3 people out of several hundred - statistical odds are that at least one of them is ill, there could also be severe family issues etc. involved. (ie. I've never understood people railing with the 'but we pay them to do this' angst .... they're humans ffs and I'm sure understood that was an important vote - if they weren't present then chances are there was a good reason) |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.