Skip to main content


Comment Preferences

  •  what always seems to be missing is context (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grollen, ciganka, turn blue, maryabein

    The severe budget shortfall of recent years comes from war, tax cuts, and government bailout and stimulus due to deregulation and the failure of trickle down economics.  Therefore any reasonable solution starts with restoring taxation, military cuts, and regulation of the financial markets.

    The Republicans want none of those things because they have seen creating crisis and government shortfall as their main strategy to slash non-military/ prison industrial complex spending.  Shrink it down to size, drown it in the bathtub.  To continue to allow the tweaks needed to ensure benefit programs' future solvency or the unemployment costs in a recession to be conflated with the actual sources of budget trouble--as the fiscal cliff construction did by design--is a grievous error.  They've made that equivelancy the conventional wisdom of mainstream punditry and corporate media.      

    •  Ok. And so? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      johnny wurster

      We still are faced with a situation that means that, unless Congress acts, take home pay for every American goes down January 1 (with a $4000 hit this spring for a family of four with a $75,000 income) as well as significant budget cuts that will mean layoffs (remember the defense contractors that wanted to send layoff notices before the election, and the Obama administration convinced them not to on the basis that they weren't sure the the defense cuts that would cause the layoffs were going to happen -- i.e., they might reach a deal).  And the potential result, according to the CBO, is a recession and 9% unemployment.  

      So here we are.  

      What you are basically saying is "I want Republicans to realize they are wrong and should just cave."  Well, I want to someone to give me a million dollars.  There's about as much chance of that happening.  

      All this talk about whether the Republicans should have taken the positions they did back when the debt ceiling vote was due don't advance the ball.  They took those positions on the deficit and debt.  The Democrats essentially validated those positions by agreeing to a deal that put the fiscal cliff in place.  So here we are.

      The more pressing question is what do we do.  And I see only two options (1) fiscal cliff, possible 9% unemployment  and recession; or (2) real compromise that makes people at RedState really unhappy and that makes people here really unhappy.  

      •  i think you're getting me wrong (0+ / 0-)

        I expect no moment of truth from the Republicans.  

        I'm afraid Democrats and independents begin to see this as something to split down the middle, but some of what the Republicans propose are actually further harmful to the economy.  Raising retirement age for Social Security, leaving those old folks in the job market, will hurt further and not help.  Cutting unemployment programs or privatizing services will harm the economy, not help.  

        •  I think that ship has sailed. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          johnny wurster
          I'm afraid Democrats and independents begin to see this as something to split down the middle,
          Democrats validated the view that the deficit needs to be cut, and the long term debt addressed now, when they allowed the Budget Control Act of 2011 to pass both Houses and be signed into law by the President.  Those cuts and tax increases are the law of the land.  

          The question now is, if you want to change the law of the land so as to avoid the potential of a recession and 9% unemployment, what kind of legislation do you propose that can pass both Houses of Congress?  Certainly, Democrats taking the position, "Wait, we were wrong to pass that Act, and the President was wrong to sign it, let's pretend we didn't agree to all those tax increases and spending cuts" is not something that will do that.  In order to avoid the
          "fiscal cliff," you are going to have to put something substantial in its place, or it won't get through both Houses of Congress. And raising $80  billion a year is not going to do it.  

          •  Durbin wants to cash out. At this point, (0+ / 0-)

            as his Senate career is ending, he is a loose cannon and very dangerous.  He supports raising the retirement age for SS.  Only a, dissociated from reality, millionaire would think like that.
            Do as the President is suggesting.  Pass a middle class cut now and wait for a new Congress before allowing lame ducks to cash out for their future employers interests.

    •  Reagan and GW Bush, 2 terms each (0+ / 0-)

      cut taxes and spent like crazy.

      But now that we're here.... longest economic downturn in 75 years..........

      FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

      by Roger Fox on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 10:27:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, this resistance to revenues is just nonsense. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The media & co. are already starting to message this fiscal cliff talking point toward hysteria, false equivalency, and flawed assumptions.  

      I just really dread having to hear questions phrased, "Since social security is going broke..." and other media set-ups.  

      The billionaire-led battering ram never stops pounding at the door.  Wall Street remains determined to carry as many public resources as possible off to the casino.  

      It gets on my nerves, and you know how I am about my nerves...

      by ciganka on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 10:40:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site