Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama makes fiscal cliff statement (454 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Here's what he got for the higher revenue line: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    looking and listening, MBishop1, Fury

    an extension of the cuts for people UNDER 250 (in this case 450). Remember that everyone's rates were going to go up with no deal.

    The rates are finally 'decoupled' which is what people here have been calling for for quite a while.

    •  they decouple in 9 hours and 20 minutes (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Armando, Mr Robert, Patango

      and dem leverage increases at that time due to rethugs desperate to avoid cuts to military budget.  He could easily say "for 50B I get extended UI insurance. For another 50B I get EITC and child tax credit. And so on....

      Power to the Peaceful!

      by misterwade on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 11:41:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That will happen anyway, to a certain extent (3+ / 0-)

        I know people are dogging on it, but I actually buy the logic which says getting increased rates now doesn't proclude getting more later. Each time the two sides come together, both have to come out with something. They're both squeezing as much juice as they can get out of each orange.

        •  as below illustrates : (0+ / 0-)

          the republicans would not be in that much worse shape after the tax cuts expire. They can simply put forward a bill to cut taxes on everybody making less than $500K and dare Democrats to vote against it. Revenue bills must originate in the House unless the Speaker chooses to take steps to alleviate that necessity.

          President Obama and Democrats may actually do what they say- not pass (or in the President's case - veto) bills that are not balanced. He would say we got those tax cuts for free. That was the middle class. Or were you really opposed to those tax cuts for the middle class and only supported tax cuts for the wealthy. So, the President and Congressional Dems can stop any bills that simply cut spending without raising new revenue. And they can win that battle politically as well.

          Therefore, the position (which simply assumes the contrary) is probably incorrect. Not saying that his view should not be considered, but simply that in my estimation it is far from conclusive.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site