The US fiscal cliff - would it really be a bad thing?

[MrJonno]

Where does this sensible system exist? In Parliamentary systems, the minority pushes their view of it too, they don't just sit silently by.

They make their views known and then generally get ignored unless they can make a big enough public stink. Which is fine by me as they lost. The sole role of a parliamantary opposition is to basically bring down the government usually their fail anything else is just public entertainment

Any executive that cant get its way should resign and then have another election to find one that can

[Coito ergo sum]

Where does this sensible system exist? In Parliamentary systems, the minority pushes their view of it too, they don't just sit silently by.

They make their views known and then generally get ignored unless they can make a big enough public stink. Which is fine by me as they lost. The sole role of a parliamantary opposition is to basically bring down the government usually their fail anything else is just public entertainment

Any executive that cant get its way should resign and then have another election to find one that can

That system doesn't sound too sensible.

[Coito ergo sum]

The Democrats ran on higher taxes for the rich on the revenue side, along with maintaining the social safety nets on the spending side. They won the election. The Senate bill has higher taxes for the rich and maintains the social safety net. They've delivered what they said they would deliver. If the Senate bill were allowed to come up for a vote in the House (as it must, being a spending bill) there is a very good chance that enough Republicans would vote with the Democratic minority to pass it.

The House has already passed legislation to avoid the fiscal cliff. They delivered what they said they would deliver. The Senate has not passed anything that avoids the fiscal cliff.

In your dreams. It was a sketch of cutting spending. No revenue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_cli ... _proposals

What has the Senate passed?

The senate is not the problem. It represents Americans pretty well. House is wacko. Full teaparytinhats.
http://thehill.com/homenews/news/274721 ... cliff-deal

So, they haven't passed anything, right?

And, that's the meme that prevails today -- the House sucks, cuz they won't pass the Democrats' preferred bill, but the Senate is sensible even though, controlled by the Senate, they won't pass a bill. Got it.

[Gerald McGrew]

You do realize that the Democrats WANT the taxes to go up across the board? Isn't that obvious?

No, not to those of us who are paying attention and/or are operating in reality.

If they didn't, Reid would have passed a bill in the Senate to make sure they don't, except for those making over $250,000 a year, and called upon the House to pass it. What's he waiting for?

Jesus but you're uninformed. The Senate passed exactly that back in July. Boehner could take it up at the House any day, any time.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/was ... 56486832/1

The House Republicans, led by Boehner, was in session and negotiating a deal, or trying to. They offered Plan B, for example, and that was rejected.

Yeah...by their own fucking party!

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/ ... rs-plan-b/

If Boehner would just put forward a bill that would pass with Democrat and moderate Republican votes (or just take up the above Senate bill), this whole thing would be much easier. But he won't take on the tea party crazies because doing so would mean the end of his Speakership. IOW, he's putting his position of Speaker ahead of the best interests of the country.

I swear...it's like you aren't even paying fucking attention at all (or you're hoping no one else has and will buy your bullshit).

[Gerald McGrew]

After the "Plan B" debacle, it was apparent that Republicans are worried about having to run for reelection after becoming the first Republicans to vote for tax increases in 20 some years. That's why they won't (right now) vote for a bill that extends the tax cuts for everyone making under $250,000; it would be raising taxes on the remaining 2%.

However, if all the tax cuts expire next week and they're presented with a bill that reinstates the tax cuts for everyone making under $250,000, they'll vote for that because they'll be voting for a tax cut and not a tax increase. Thus they can go back to their districts and say they still have not voted for any tax increases.

That's how wedded today's GOP is to the ideology of "taxes are evil and all tax increases are bad".

[Gerald McGrew]

Another interesting dynamic in this whole thing is how everyone seems to agree that extreme deficit cutting in the midst of a slow recovery or recession is counter-productive.

[amused]

After the "Plan B" debacle, it was apparent that Republicans are worried about having to run for reelection after becoming the first Republicans to vote for tax increases in 20 some years. That's why they won't (right now) vote for a bill that extends the tax cuts for everyone making under $250,000; it would be raising taxes on the remaining 2%.

However, if all the tax cuts expire next week and they're presented with a bill that reinstates the tax cuts for everyone making under $250,000, they'll vote for that because they'll be voting for a tax cut and not a tax increase. Thus they can go back to their districts and say they still have not voted for any tax increases.

That's how wedded today's GOP is to the ideology of "taxes are evil and all tax increases are bad".

Politically, it's not a bad plan. It's not really a fiscal cliff anyway, it's more of a fiscal stair-step that can be undone at any time. So waiting a week more to give the Republicans some political cover won't be a disaster.

[Gerald McGrew]

Politically, it's not a bad plan. It's not really a fiscal cliff anyway, it's more of a fiscal stair-step that can be undone at any time. So waiting a week more to give the Republicans some political cover won't be a disaster.

In the long run, I agree. But in the short term, the markets aren't reacting positively and surveys have shown that a lack of a solution is affecting consumer spending.

[Seth]

After the "Plan B" debacle, it was apparent that Republicans are worried about having to run for reelection after becoming the first Republicans to vote for tax increases in 20 some years. That's why they won't (right now) vote for a bill that extends the tax cuts for everyone making under $250,000; it would be raising taxes on the remaining 2%.

However, if all the tax cuts expire next week and they're presented with a bill that reinstates the tax cuts for everyone making under $250,000, they'll vote for that because they'll be voting for a tax cut and not a tax increase. Thus they can go back to their districts and say they still have not voted for any tax increases.

That's how wedded today's GOP is to the ideology of "taxes are evil and all tax increases are bad".

Politically, it's not a bad plan. It's not really a fiscal cliff anyway, it's more of a fiscal stair-step that can be undone at any time. So waiting a week more to give the Republicans some political cover won't be a disaster.

Yup. Let it happen and blame it on Obama's intransigence then propose Plan B, or Plan C again as people become outraged how much their taxes have gone up.

Congress can reverse course at any time before the IRS starts collecting next year's taxes, and I'm quite sure it will.

This is all brinksmanship for the credulous lumpen proletariat aimed at the mid-term Congressional elections.

[cronus]

This is what the global speculators have been waiting for. Those vultures are circling but they are smart enough to wait quietly. This is the main meal for them and they don't want it to get away.

[cronus]

[Coito ergo sum]

Whew!

Good thing we avoided that fiscal cliff.

$1 of spending cuts for every $41 of tax increases. 77% of households get a tax hike (if expiration of payroll tax cut is included). http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-0 ... holds.html

But, since the Democrats have gotten pretty much everything they wanted, let's see what happens in 2013.

[MrJonno]

Sort of normal for taxes to go up in bad times, don't know anywhere else where that doesnt happen

[Faithfree]

Turned out to be a fiscal bungee jump.

[Coito ergo sum]

Sort of normal for taxes to go up in bad times, don't know anywhere else where that doesnt happen

The problem is the -- again -- complete disregard of spending cuts. Not only were there no net cuts, we're AGAIN spending more. As Milton Friedman put it, spending is taxing. "Keep your eye on ....how much government is spending, because that’s the true tax … If you’re not paying for it in the form of explicit taxes, you’re paying for it indirectly in the form of inflation or in the form of borrowing. The thing you should keep your eye on is what government spends, and the real problem is to hold down government spending as a fraction of our income, and if you do that, you can stop worrying about the debt."