Skip to main content

The House and Senate Republicans who voted for this 'deal', voted for $3.9 trillion more federal debt. The CBO has scored this 'deal', and this is an enormous budget-buster.

So the budget situation more than ever requires a balanced plan.  The President   promised that a balanced plan includes $1.6 trillion in revenue over 10 years.

Carney said Tuesday that Obama would reprise his plan from earlier this year to raise $1.6 trillion in taxes by raising tax rates, imposing a new special tax on millionaires and scaling back deductions and loopholes.
This deal gets about $600 billion in new revenue.  The President and Democrats must ensure that future budget plans, spending AND revenue, includes at least $1 trillion in new revenue.  They must publicly state that there is a gap of $1 trillion in revenue.
Anything less than the bottom line $1 trillion in revenue......NO!. UNACCEPTABLE!

As HoundDog diaried earlier today,  With-tax-revenues-of-only-18%-of-GDP-we-can-not-sustain-government-spending-of-23%  !!
 

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (7+ / 0-)

    "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

    by oregonj on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:34:30 PM PST

  •  Or (6+ / 0-)

    we could run deficits until the economy grows fast enough to erase them, as happened under Clinton in the 90s.  Deficits are not the problem especially at 0 percent interest.

    Still enjoying my stimulus package.

    by Kevvboy on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:41:45 PM PST

    •  where did he promise anything? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HoundDog

      that article you linked to states it was his opening bid.

      •  woops meant to be a comment, not a reply (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoundDog
      •  Here is Obama's budget message (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HoundDog
        In the Budget, I reiterate my opposition to permanently extending the Bush tax cuts for families
        making more than $250,000 a year and my opposition to a more generous estate tax than we had
        in 2009 benefiting only the very largest estates. These policies were unfair and unaffordable when
        they were passed, and they remain so today. I will push for their expiration in the coming year. I
        also propose to eliminate special tax breaks for oil and gas companies; preferred treatment for the
        purchase of corporate jets; tax rules that give a larger percentage deduction to the wealthiest two
        percent than to middle-class families for itemized deductions; and a loophole that allows some of the
        wealthiest money managers in the country to pay only 15 percent tax on the millions of dollars they
        earn. And I support tax reform that observes the “Buffett Rule” that no household making more than
        $1 million annually should pay a smaller share of its income taxes than middle-class families pay.

        "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

        by oregonj on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:02:25 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, I believe the $1.6 was not considered to be (0+ / 0-)

        sufficient to balance the budget merely a significant first step in the right direction.

        The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

        by HoundDog on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:26:33 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  But if you don't spend on the right stuff . . . (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HoundDog, WattleBreakfast

      Tax breaks on oil companies, tax breaks for $250,000-$450,000 income households, tax breaks for $1 million-$5 million estates, farm subsidies, military equipment that doesn't work, military commitments that don't work -- none of this stuff is economically productive.

      And what we appear headed for is indiscriminate cuts, as opposed to cuts that don't harm growth and new taxes and spending targeted to maximize economic growth.

      •  Great point. We need to be investing in (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        oregonj

        infrastructure spending that creates jobs in America.  And, for that we need additional revenues.

        Many are suggesting we simply run deficits and debts, and although there are problems with this approach as at some point it would become inflationary, it would be vastly better than where we are headed now.

        Because the GOP has said they will not extend the debt ceiling without a one for one matching dollars for dollars cut in spending.  They are not going to allow this scenario and until we retake the House, if ever, they hold the cards.

        We do not have the power to unilaterally defy the debt ceiling unless Obama reverses himself on that far out platinum coinage idea. Which I wouldn't oppose because of the tragic nightmare of suffering the GOP planned spending cuts, that we seem to have just endorsed, are going to cause.  

        But, Obama's advisors have told him the coinage idea would be unconstitutional, and if we did it to override the constitutionally specified House control of budget they may be right.

        Although, our lawyer can argue that the constitution also says our debt shall be sacrosanct and never defaulted upon, and we can argue that past expenditures that constitute the debt were authorized by the House as are the current expenditures.

        But, this is mute because Obama has said he isn't going down that road.

        I look forward to what road he plans to follow.

        His New Years Eve pronouncement suggested any further reductions of government spending should be matched by equal amounts of tax revenues which infuriated the GOP until they apparently decided what he says doesn't matter.

        He will apparently use his State of the Union speech and others to jawbone the House into go along with his plan.   Let's see how that works out.  Maybe the House GOP will come to see reason and the public will rally behind the President.

        He will be in a strong position politically on this issue this year.  But we may need 20 years in a row of such speeches until we take back the House and raise taxes enough to sustain progressive spending.

        The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

        by HoundDog on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:39:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  More taxes are still on the table (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LordMike

          The President was very clear on that in his statement on the Senate package yesterday:

          There’s more work to do to reduce our deficits, and I’m willing to do it. But tonight’s agreement ensures that, going forward, we will continue to reduce the deficit through a combination of new spending cuts and new revenues from the wealthiest Americans.  And as we address our ongoing fiscal challenges, I will continue to fight every day on behalf of the middle class and all those fighting to get into the middle class to forge an economy that grows from the middle out, not from the top down.

          "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

          by oregonj on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:46:16 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, but isn't the tax deal good for 5 years? (0+ / 0-)

            The elevation of appearance over substance, of celebrity over character, of short term gains over lasting achievement displays a poverty of ambition. It distracts you from what's truly important. - Barack Obama

            by helfenburg on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 05:10:44 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Well, that might be possible with bogus bubbles (0+ / 0-)

      and illusory growth, e.g. the dot-com thingy, which fueled the Clinton budget, and then  the sub-prime thingy.  But failing speculative bubbles and other economic illusions, where does the fast growth come from?

      Where's the revenue going to come from if Bush-era tax cuts on those making less than $400,000 are now permanent?

      Looks bogus to me, frankly.  Totally bogus.

      The elevation of appearance over substance, of celebrity over character, of short term gains over lasting achievement displays a poverty of ambition. It distracts you from what's truly important. - Barack Obama

      by helfenburg on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 05:09:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  this is what its cheerleaders are missing (13+ / 0-)

    this hamstrings us on revenues, while keeping the debt ceiling brinksmanship inevitable. the republicans will demand severe cuts, and there won't be any bargaining chips. these next months are going to be ugly.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:43:13 PM PST

    •  Not as Ugly as the Rest of My Life as I Prepare (5+ / 0-)

      to go on medicare & ss.

      I expect to be running a lathe into my 80's provided I can stand up that long.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:47:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  that's the bottom line (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Burned, lakehillsliberal

        don't plan on retiring, and hope there are jobs.

        The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

        by Laurence Lewis on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:48:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's ok because we have to let the republicans win (0+ / 0-)

          so we can feel good about ourselves.  Obama screwed this up royally.  He could have negotiated us out of a long term mess and instead has dug us digger and this will REQUIRE cuts in SS, Medicare and Medicaid.  I don't understand why people cannot see this but apparently we have a shortage of people that can add and subtract or even acknowledge what the CBO has been telling us.  Our problems go away if we just let the Bush Tax Cuts expire......if not get ready for austerity.

      •  Keep on truckin' Gooserock. We need all the (0+ / 0-)

        articulate progressive and productive people who can create value added as we can get.

        The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

        by HoundDog on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:41:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  There is a political risk to Republican's (0+ / 0-)

      for forcing the nation into default, so its not like they have all the bargaining chips and we have none.

      Expose the lies. Fight for the truth. Push progressive politics. Save our planet. Health care is a right, not a privilege.

      by lighttheway on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:48:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here's what the other side is saying.... (0+ / 0-)
      “The House should move on this because mixing up tax issues and spending issues is a fool’s errand. It is putting piranha in the goldfish tank, because the taxes will eat up all the spending cuts,” Norquist said, suggesting Democrats would demand more taxes in exchange for House GOP demands on spending. “The bigger the deal you’re talking about, the bigger the tax increase you’re looking at.”

      When asked about the difference between the Senate deal and Boehner’s “Plan B,” which Norquist deemed would not violate his Taxpayer Protection Pledge, he compared saving taxpayers from a rate hike to saving drowning passengers on a sinking ship. If you can save 90 of 100, Norquist said, you do it.

      ” You can’t save all 100, so I’m not going to try? I don’t think that’s what the Red Cross guys teach you,” Norquist said. “Get as many out as you can. Save as many taxpayers as you can. That’s what this fight is about right now. The next fight is over spending.”

      A needed spending fight should to be waged but what can't be left out are defense and DHS.

      I don't think revenue will be a topic in the next two months since spending wasn't right now.  If there was a strategic win for the GOP it was paring this into two pieces.  IMHO, while Republicans were looked at for the holdup on revenue - Democrats will be vilified by the GOP as the ho;dup to spending reform.

      The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

      by ctexrep on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:54:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well, where are the $4 trillion in cuts? (5+ / 0-)

    The President said his approach was $2.5 dollars in cuts for every $1 of revenue.   $1.6 trillion in revenue means $4 trillion in cuts.  So I'm not sure you want to frame it that way.  

    Aside from that, I know the President is trying to set the narrative that he is still looking for more tax hikes on the rich, but frankly, I think that most of the public is going to view this as his tax hike on the rich.  I don't see how, immediately after this passes, he's going to be able to say, "I just got tax hikes on the rich, now I need tax hikes on the rich" with credibility to much of the country.  

    I think he'll try, but I don't think the narrative is going to be on his side next time.  I think the average person out there is going to say, Ok, the President got the tax hikes he promised, now is time for the spending cuts he promised.  

    I really think this fiscal cliff vote was a big win for the President.  But ironically enough, I think it weakens his position for the fight over spending cuts that should begin about 8:00 a.m. tomorrow morning.

    •  A Big Battle Win Is Moot If You Lose the War. (2+ / 0-)

      I'll give away my house if he says he needs tax hikes on the rich later.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 06:49:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He can say it, but he won't have any credibility (0+ / 0-)

        especially if he starts saying it tomorrow, when the Republicans start talking about spending cuts.

        Right after his big win on tax hikes for the rich, he can't say, with any credibility, say, "now I need tax hikes on the rich to offset the $3.6 trillion we just added to the deficit."  

    •  And that's why it's not a big win (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WattleBreakfast

      Anyone making less than about $150,000 a year needed this deal to work out better than it has.  As things go forward, we're going to need some serious activism to weed out the corporatist majority in Congress.  First step; electoral and campaign reform.  Statewide initiatives to put a stop to gerrymandering.  And then a footrace between putting a constitutional amendment up that overturns Citizens United and putting a decent Supreme Court in place that overturns Citizens United.

    •  I think your comment is spot on. (0+ / 0-)

      There will be cuts, my hope is that since we didn't create this mess overnight, it doesn't have to be fixed overnight.

      The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

      by ctexrep on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:00:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Read Obama's budget message (0+ / 0-)

      Those 'cuts' include last year's $1 trillion in cuts, and the savings from ending the two wars. The ratio without those is closer to 2 to 1, I believe.

      In the Budget, I reiterate my opposition to permanently extending the Bush tax cuts for families
      making more than $250,000 a year and my opposition to a more generous estate tax than we had
      in 2009 benefiting only the very largest estates. These policies were unfair and unaffordable when
      they were passed, and they remain so today. I will push for their expiration in the coming year. I
      also propose to eliminate special tax breaks for oil and gas companies; preferred treatment for the
      purchase of corporate jets; tax rules that give a larger percentage deduction to the wealthiest two
      percent than to middle-class families for itemized deductions; and a loophole that allows some of the
      wealthiest money managers in the country to pay only 15 percent tax on the millions of dollars they
      earn. And I support tax reform that observes the “Buffett Rule” that no household making more than
      $1 million annually should pay a smaller share of its income taxes than middle-class families pay.

      "Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist."

      by oregonj on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:05:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Did you read what Rubio said about Chained-CPI? (0+ / 0-)
      Marco Rubio ‏@marcorubio

      Report that #GOP insisting on changes to social security as part of #fiscalcliff false.BTW those changes are supported by @barackobama.

      https://twitter.com/...

      Coffeetalk, I doubt any GOPer will support entitlement cuts.

      Furthermore, the bond market is not demanding any spending cuts.

      So why cut?

      Learn about Centrist Economics, learn about Robert Rubin's Hamilton Project. www.hamiltonproject.org

      by PatriciaVa on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 08:38:42 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Shrug. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    liberte

    Who cares?  Obama didn't run on balancing the budget.  He ran on balancing the budget in a balanced way.  The Republicans are the ones who forced austerity into the national conversation.  If this deal passes, they can worry about the additional revenue and cuts.

    Are so-called "progressives" really going to be angry that this President didn't balance the budget when they've been averse to austerity policy for the last four years?

    Please.

  •  The notion that the economy will improve... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ferg

    ...over the next 10 years sufficient to sustain these low taxes is not reasonable, not predicted, not in any outlook. And now Democrats want low taxes? Democrats was low taxes AND SS and Medicare as we know it, KNOWING the unlikelihood of defense reductions now? That won't happen.  

    For those in the two parties committed to reducing SS and Medicare into means tested assistance for the very poor then a $4 trillion deficit sets them up pretty well for drastic cuts. Where else do people really think the money will come from? Or do people really think there will be responsible functional legislation to follow?

    There's plenty of money to do what Democrats voted for. But by repeating Bush's tax cuts and making them permanent for most taxpayers is never going to work.

    •  I agree about the math (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TrueBlueDem, LordMike

      But if you ask the 98% whose taxes were going to go up after 1/1 (based on the original 250K cap) if they were okay with that, they'd say no. That's the problem. People want the services but want someone else to pay for them.  

      That's just the reality. Contributing to the collective good sounds great in principle, but in reality, we're all a bit more selfish than we'd like to believe.  A couple years ago my school district was voting on a levy to property tax bills to help avoid teacher layoffs and other spending challenges.  I voted for it, but when a guy came to my door to lobby for its passage, I told him it wasn't going to pass. When he asked why I felt that way, I said  because everyone just got their property tax bill in the mail a couple weeks before the election. I was correct. It went down to defeat.

      •  I used to vote for the school funding and my (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ferg, TrueBlueDem

        friends that had kids in school used to vote against the funding.  I don't know who they thought should pay for their kids but apparently it wasn't them.

      •  We voted to increase taxes here in Ca this yr (0+ / 0-)

        IMO we need a little party introspection as to our values and vision. When Dems support not paying for our Social Security payroll deductions and call $450k/y middle class then I'm confused what we're all about.

      •  Yeah, but the states earn limited dollars, the (0+ / 0-)

        fed gov issues those dollars.

        Their budget considerations are nothing alike.

        For the size government we have, our taxes are pretty high.

        The problem is accumulated wealth at the top, a new aristocracy.

        Our only deficit is a democracy deficit, and that just keeps getting larger.

  •  Take this in sequential steps. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Iberian

    Pass this Senate bill.

    Insist on another 1$ in revenue for every $2 in cuts when they fix the sequestration --- with the cuts being 50% big-business subsidies (Oil, Tobacco, Godzilla banks), 25% entitlements, and 25% military.

    Insist on increased revenues being the majority of a debt-ceiling compromise.

    Establish mandatory licensing fees and liability insurance policies for all current/future firearms owners --- they want to compare guns to cars, then treat guns like cars.

    Close all offshore tax-havens and foreign-bank tax evasions.  Penalties include seizure of all assets and prison time for currency racketeering.

    I count even the single grain of sand to be a higher life-form than the likes of Sarah Palin and her odious ilk.

    by Liberal Panzer on Tue Jan 01, 2013 at 07:14:46 PM PST

    •  What leverage do the Dems have to "insist" (0+ / 0-)

      on anything?

      •  It takes away Boehner's talking points. (0+ / 0-)

        Big businesses targeted are all in vulture-capitalist retraction --- they haven't ben "job creators" for years now.

        Gun-nuts are getting a free ride from taxpayers, hiding behind a Constitution they know absolutely nothing about.

        There's no politically-patriotic justification for offshored tax havens.  Take the "unAmerican" label and hang it around their necks like anchor-chain on Scrooge and Marley.

        In short:  Norquistas do not fear public disdain; they do, however, fear being drowned in their own bathtubs.

        I count even the single grain of sand to be a higher life-form than the likes of Sarah Palin and her odious ilk.

        by Liberal Panzer on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 09:39:58 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  I am watching the Democrats taking the lead on (0+ / 0-)

    the bill that will guarantee the demise of SS and Medicare, FDR is rolling in his grave.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site