White House won't accept new tax offer from Republican leader

Comments (79)
usagadfly wrote:

The question is one of commitment. Is the US Government more committed to providing basic health care and old age support for its own citizens, or to war without end to assure Jewish ethnic domination of Southwest Asia? For one Party, the answer is beyond obvious. That Party’s policies have gotten us precisely here.

There is no alternative to going over the “cliff” that does not commit the Federal Government to abandoning its own citizens while pretending not to. This is the only method to get taxes on the wealthy close to where they should be and military spending closer as well. And those are the two parts of the American economy most out of kilter.

Later, tax relief can easily be agreed to by both sides for the middle and working classes. But Republicans, as currently constituted, will never stop starting wars and start taxing the rich. Let the rich follow their money out of the country, and strip the foreigners of the ability to buy American politicians. Hey, what about making it illegal for anyone to buy a politician??

Dec 16, 2012 7:22am EST  --  Report as abuse
KRB wrote:

This is one time where doing nothing is more likely to have a long term positive result. Yes, this “Fiscal Cliff” will be a bitter pill to swallow, but long term it will likely be single best inaction opportunity to promote our countries long term health. Thereapy is often slow and painful, but the ensuing recovery will be real.
Any action that does less to reduce the deficit is only kicking the can down the road further. Just like individuals that dug a financial hole and had to endure hard times to recover, this country will need to do the same. Talking BOLD action to perpetuate this illness will only result in the dollar loosing is reserve currency status quicker.
No pain, no gain.

Dec 16, 2012 10:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
Billmenow wrote:

It does not matter what Boehner give Obama because Obama will raise the bar. Obama does NOT want a deal as it will not benefit him and his party. Obama wants to go off the cliff and then come back as the GOD that saved the country’s middle class.

Dec 16, 2012 10:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
Billmenow wrote:

usagadfly I will bet you that even when they tax the rich the middle class will still sink because that is not what this whole thing is about. It is having the Government controlling you life and giving you what they think you deserve. Which is not much unless you are part of the elite.

Dec 16, 2012 10:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
Doc00001 wrote:


I agree with you but not where the Jewish domination comes in. On that single point of disagreement, I don’t see where any one ethnic or religious group is guilty. In my view, Republicans have the sense of entitlement they so vehemently oppose. They believe that if one who has money, they should be entitled to acquire even more. Even if they have to establish legislation and societal norms to facilitate their accumulation of wealth. The rest of us,,,, gag on the leavings!
Hurray for Obama for finally digging in his heels and forcing these idiots to face what the American people want. Even if it is merely slowing the rate of decay.

Dec 16, 2012 10:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
Mackenziella wrote:

When You consider Obama’s presidency in terms of a mission to transfer as much capital out of the private sector and into to the government sector as fast as he can, it all makes sense – including the “fundamental transformation” of the United States- from the American political philosophy to the communist world government. Obama’s chosen legacy is to deliver the USA to the communists – as the communist have long been patiently and deviously planning.

The fiscal cliff is a win-win for Obama’s true agenda as it also delivers the long sought after goal of our enemies- the destruction of United States military strength.

Dec 16, 2012 10:47am EST  --  Report as abuse
fdtn wrote:

OK Mr. President. Ball’s in your court. Pick any one of the major entitlement programs (including the one you just created out of thin air) and make some meaningful cuts.

Sure your supporters will give the typical kneed-jerk defense spending whining but as defense spending is well below that of the real problems, then everyone with their eyes open know where the cuts have to be made.

Sure, there’ll be the typical “we’ll address cuts later” urge, but a dynamic, problem solving leader such as yourself surely would not do that.

Dec 16, 2012 11:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
microbob wrote:

You can’t reason with a dictator. This guy is so full of himself he won’t cooperate with anyone. Republicans, walk away. Let the jerk fall off the cliff with everyone else. You can’t deal with him, period!

Dec 16, 2012 11:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
Nadafinga wrote:

As a business owner that makes a little over the dreaded 250k mark, I can assure you that I am neither a millionaire or billionaire. I can also assure you that as a business owner I have the choice of cutting expenses to make up for the extra tax that I am being forced to pay. And can you guess what is the largest expense in running a business? Think about how this is going to effect the economy.

Dec 16, 2012 11:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
microbob wrote:

usagadfly, are you real? 10% of the most wealthy already pay over 50% of the taxes in this country, and almost 50% of the wage earners pay NO taxes at all. This Robin Hood mentality drives me crazy. If you want to make money, then get off your butts and get two or three jobs, get an education, etc. Don’t sit there and whine about those who are successful. EVERYONE has that opportunity, but you have to be willing to work for it. Even if you took the wealth away from all the millionaires, it wouldn’t even put a dent in our 16 TRILLION debt, soon to climb again because Obama wants to spend MORE and create more “stimulus” without cutting spending. Tell me, how has the past “stimulus” created more jobs? After the money is gone we’re right back to where we were before. GOVERNMENT DOES NOT MAKE JOBS. People DO!

Dec 16, 2012 11:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
Corker wrote:

where in your opinion should taxes on the wealthy be? we have record revenues, spending is the problem. the top 10% already pay 70% of the taxes.

repubs believe if one has money they are entitled to acquire more?? and why wouldnt they be? i suppose you get to decide when they have enough.

Dec 16, 2012 11:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
Ashby wrote:

The leadership of both parties are like people from different religions arguing over who’s god is real. Taxing the rich is fine, but it is only for political purposes, it makes no real difference. As a population the middle class have most of the money and consume most of the spending. Those are the people who will pay, through a combination of stealth taxes and benefit reductions and delays.

Dec 16, 2012 11:31am EST  --  Report as abuse
cocostar wrote:

I can’t understand how the republicans can feel justified in talking about their idea’s on cutting spending and reducing deficits after their party took us into 2 unfunded wars and a republican administrations policy’s destroyed our economy and a lot of our infrastructure which are causing the current condition.
Just to clean up the mess that their leadership left to President Obama and his administration will take years of sacrifice tax increases and cuts to neutralize and balance.
And I think a lot of the population is starting to figure out that this is exactly what the republicans wanted when they destroyed the gains of the Clinton Administration and dumped their mess on Obama.

Years of republican hidden agenda and deception are very apparent at this point in history. The entitlements that they have objected to that are good for the people and the infrastructure of the country are very much in danger from the obstruction and deception that has generated the mass debt of the last 12 years the country is faced with.

Dec 16, 2012 11:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
tmbttd1 wrote:

NOTHING, absolutely nothing from Obama indicates to me one whit of willingness on his part to arrive at any concessions whatsoever.

Therefore, I am of the opinion to go over the “cliff” and then the RNC must start a massive public campaign to malign in each and any way to refusal of liberal democrats, individually and collectively, local, state and territorially, to solve the American financial crisis….and I would keep hammering them daily, weekly, monthly right up to and through the 2014 elections. Flood the announcements such that the liberal media has no option but to respond.

Warefare? Let there be by god financial warfare.

Dec 16, 2012 11:47am EST  --  Report as abuse
MREmerald wrote:

And the media will still put the onus on republicans rather than ask anything of the president. Despite the fact that the president would not only lose republican votes but also a sizable number of democrat votes. The most bipartisan of his accomplishments being the unanimous vote against his budget.

Dec 16, 2012 11:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
JohnnyPryorMD wrote:

I think Obama probably lied about cuts in entitlements in exchange. He pushed it off until after the election knowing that if he lost, it wouldn’t matter, but if he won… he wouldn’t do it.

Bohner fell for it the first time… when the Fiscal Cliff was actually meaningful and there was actually an opportunity to forge compromise. He let that time pass. Obama has already won. But if the Conservatives simply concede to save their jobs… they are going to cost many of us who don’t currently work for the government ours. And our children their futures and freedoms.

Dec 16, 2012 11:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
victor672 wrote:

So everything he said during the campaign was a lie. Everything about bi-partisan cooperation, reaching across the aisle, not playing partisan politics. Everything. Not surprising from the King of Liars.

Dec 16, 2012 12:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cocostar wrote:

miccrobob, the more you have the more protection you need. You have more you pay more!
10000 is a lot different than 10000000. Everything about it is different. Cost, pollution, waste, carbon footprint!
The more you got the more you pay. Anything else is tyranny!

Dec 16, 2012 12:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
minalta wrote:

If the Republicans don’t succeed in getting spending cuts (mostly to “entitlement” programs) at least equal to the amount of revenue (tax) increases the Republican Party is dead. The country can’t survive having over half it’s citizens as government employees or on “welfare”.

Dec 16, 2012 12:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
billpr wrote:

microbob.. the fact that this “dictator” as you call him is even talking to you guys is wrong.. The R’s passed laws in 1992 that were to last 10 years and then expire.. Those laws were intended to benefit people such as yourself and they succeeded beyond expectations. Unfortunately, the rest of us got screwed.. It is now time to put this mess, that you created, back on balance. When is enough, enough for you guys. You got us into a war with Iraq with lies, you created a miserable economic culture, thousands dead, more thousands wounded, open festering racism (tea party).. EVERY TIME YOU GUYS WIN ELECTIONS YOU CAN’T GOVERN WITHOUT SCREWING THINGS UP!!!

Dec 16, 2012 12:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Max17 wrote:

The top 10% of wage earners already pay over 70% of federal income taxes. And societal mooches bedwet that it’s not enough. Frankly, you societal mooches need to shut up until you start paying your fair share.

Dec 16, 2012 12:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
texpro wrote:

The fiscal cliff must occur.
Each side can claim that something good happened – spending cuts for conservatives and tax increases for liberals.
Each can blame the other side for any bad consequences. If there are any.

Obama has more to gain since the tax increases will happen anyway.
Obama will continue to try to hold spending cuts hostage to tax increases on his terms. If Boehner gives in, Obama will raise the bar.

Obama’s goal is to make the republicans look bad so he can return to a Democratic majority in the House so he can return to those days. This begins by setting the republicans up to blame for an economic tragedy. He has set up the tragedy. Now all he has to do is be able to blame the republicans and in two years, he will have the house back.

Of course, there is that small issue of the debt limit coming up. If Boehner has learned his lesson and refuses to refuses to increase the debt limit, real spending reductions will then have a chance.

Two years is a long time. If the republicans correct and the real problem is spending rather than taxation, they will have 2 years to prove that they are serious and begin real work to pull the country out of the quagmire of excessive debt.

Dec 16, 2012 12:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Str8tTalkHawk wrote:

DINGY HARRY REID won’t bring the ObaMarxist joke of a “budget proposal” to the Senate for a vote because NO DEMOMARXIST SENATOR WOULD VOTE FOR IT!!!

Make the communist street thug imposter from Kenya ObaMarxist OWN his DEPRESSION! Let him claim MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!

Dec 16, 2012 12:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
toc7 wrote:

Taxing the rich only pays for 8 days of government spending. Drastically cutting back on government spending is crucial. Our government spent $27 million dollars to teach Moroccans to make pottery, $1.5 million towards vineyards to help grow grapes, billions of dollars pouring into the middle east. Our money is best utilized by the wage earners where they can invest in the market, small businesses and buying goods and services. This is what stimulates the economy and creates jobs. Creating more government jobs creates further debt to cover those salaries. Taxing the rich does not stimulate our economy particularly when our government throws good money towards useless programs. It only makes those who are for it feel better. It is an emotional decision not an economic one.

Dec 16, 2012 12:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
nola7868 wrote:

We don’t have a taxation problem in this country. We have a spending problem. Obama has doubled the debt since he has been in office. Why won’t the Democrats work on cutting spending? All they want is tax, tax, tax.

Dec 16, 2012 12:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
texpro wrote:

As long as the House refuses to put the debt limit on the negotiating table, there will be no deal.
There will be no disaster, we have lived with these tax rates before. We have lived with lower rates of spending on our military and entitlements before.

The real problem for Obama is the debt limit. If the republicans are serious, they will refuse to raise the debt limit. The will begin serious spending reductions.

Dec 16, 2012 12:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse

“Give us everything and in return, nothing.” This is a dictatorship.

Dec 16, 2012 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Oscarphone wrote:

Everything the President has said in the last few weeks leads me to believe that he doesn’t want a bi-partisan deal. He wants what he wants and that’s it. His response to Boehner’s proposal proves this. Senator Patty Murray, who is usually on the inside track on this stuff has stated that she wants the President to go off the “cliff”. Why I have no idea but remember that the President’s right hand man for a number of years famously said that no crisis should “go to waste”. Pretty cynical.

A Community Organizer’s background isn’t compromise but beating into submission.

Dec 16, 2012 12:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bryan60074 wrote:

So sick of people being brainwashed that high earners are those making 250 or more. Is 250K a lot? Yes. If you live in Iowa certainly. If you live in NYC or California not necessarily.
1 size govt does not work for all.
If you have 2-3 kids and actually plan for paying for your kids college, without govt loans, and are saving for your own retirement, social security may not be there and talks that if you make over 250K you won’t be entitled to medicare or SS, it’s not a lot if you don’t rely on the govt.
Hopefully, people get to be “high earners” during the late stage of their careers when they save for retirement, etc. How can anyone accumulate wealth when the govt & states wants to take 1/2 of what you earn? You can’t. You will be rely on the govt. for everything. People should challenge themselves and their kids to do better and be rewarded for it, not penalized because the govt thinks you aren’t paying your fair share. Anyone who disagrees try looking at the Fed Tax table. There is already a 3% surcharge tax in place starting 2013 with Obamascare on “top earners” over 250K…any raise in tax plus the 3% but you never hear about that.

Dec 16, 2012 12:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
pythonicus wrote:

I think we all agree that we need to get back to a ratio of spending versus taxation that is close to 1:1. The way to get there is pretty obvious when you look at the numbers. Spending has increased dramatically since the 1990s, whereas Fed taxation has been pretty level. We need to spend far less now than we have the last 8 years, that means cuts and changes to many entitlement programs and the military to some degree.

We also need to make sure that taxes are fair. Close loopholes, remove some deductions, tax those making over $1M back up to Clinton era, keep everyone else the same.

The sad reality, however, is that those that elected Obama want free stuff, and they want the rich to pay for it. With that mentality, we will never get back to sound economic policy.

You cannot raise taxes enough to pay for the deficit, it is impossible.

And think about philosophically, why would taxes as a percent of GDP need to go up? Because of efficiencies from technology and economies of scale, taxes should be going down; it clearly means the government is getting involved in more and more aspects of business and life.

Dec 16, 2012 12:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mmilesll wrote:

All the RINO/Boehner did was make a fool of himself and really piss off conservatives like me

Dec 16, 2012 1:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kenny500c wrote:

Why does the media keep stating $250,000 when the correct number is $200,000?

Dec 16, 2012 1:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@microbob, please post one factual item that backs up your claim of Obama being a ‘dictator’. Also you say ‘almost 50% of the wage earners pay NO taxes at all.’, that is just plain wrong, ANYONE that makes money pays FICA (which is a regressive tax if anything), EVERYONE pays gas tax, EVERYONE pays sales tax (in states with it), any land owners pays property tax. Get out of your Rovian bubble and see reality for what it is.

This is the problem with the right nowadays, it started with the right wing AM talk radio craze of the 90′s and only got worse in the 00′s with internet bloggers and FOX ‘news’. Many on the right have created this bubble of non-reality around themselves and they have become the problem instead of part of the solution.

Dec 16, 2012 1:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JoefromOH wrote:

If we go over the cliff populist rage will be bipartisan trumping any political gains of either Party each of whom will be blaming the other. A compromise deal would serve them better as the next election is 22 months away and between the public’s short memory and the politicians’ capacity for spin, the compromise will be remembered with far less pain than falling over the cliff and into deeper recession.

Dec 16, 2012 1:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
accbar wrote:

The Fed announced it is newly “buying” 45 billions in new treasury bonds every month for God knows how long. This on top of a new round of junk mortgage purchases for billions more (by what authority?). These purchases obligate us further and debase our currency into an ever deeper pit. All this while the republicrats argue over pennies more to steal, while they have jaundiced eye on an exploding tax hike in January.
The fiscal cliff they created is a bump to the collapse our dear leader and his minion progressive democrats with rino stooges have created.
Thank God for Jesus the Christ, who saves us from all fear of what these demons may do to us. For we will live in Him without money, or any attempt at tyranny. Truly, we have no king but Jesus the Christ.

Dec 16, 2012 1:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Flayer wrote:

Why do some of my fellow citizens believe that they have the “right” to my property I’d totally beyond me. My father worked for a company who paid the same salary to all those in the same position. My parents lived beneath their means in order to save money for their old age, so as not to need to bother anybody and to take care of themselves.They chose to invest their after tax savings in income property which they paid off over 30+ years of working and proper budgeting. Others in the same company chose to spend all their money by living in nicer homes, taking expensive vacations, buying new cars and so on. Now my parents are “evil” and “selfish” and “not paying their fair share” (by just taking care of themselves?) and even “idiot” (by poster Doc00001!). I could return fire with a few of my choice insults but would rather ask you posters above why my parents are deserving of your scorn and extortion of their property? Perhaps you are descendants of some of their colleagues who spent every penny they earned and are now jealous or covetous and incapable of accumulating for yourself except by the old fashioned way: plunder. If they had not been long-sighted and prudent there would not be anything for you to even covet? I made mistakes in MY life but never did I expect my choices to be your obligation.

Dec 16, 2012 2:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Flayer wrote:

Why do some of my fellow citizens believe that they have the “right” to my property I’d totally beyond me. My father worked for a company who paid the same salary to all those in the same position. My parents lived beneath their means in order to save money for their old age, so as not to need to bother anybody and to take care of themselves.They chose to invest their after tax savings in income property which they paid off over 30+ years of working and proper budgeting. Others in the same company chose to spend all their money by living in nicer homes, taking expensive vacations, buying new cars and so on. Now my parents are “evil” and “selfish” and “not paying their fair share” (by just taking care of themselves?) and even “idiot” (by poster Doc00001!). I could return fire with a few of my choice insults but would rather ask you posters above why my parents are deserving of your scorn and extortion of their property? Perhaps you are descendants of some of their colleagues who spent every penny they earned and are now jealous or covetous and incapable of accumulating for yourself except by the old fashioned way: plunder. If they had not been long-sighted and prudent there would not be anything for you to even covet? I made mistakes in MY life but never did I expect my choices to be your obligation.

Dec 16, 2012 2:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Corker wrote:


the left routinely called Bush a dictator and now we have a president who has said things like he cant wait for congress so he is going to act himself, and you’re upset? and FICA is a premium for a benefit received, but it seems you would prefer it to be another welfare program.

Dec 16, 2012 2:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Flayer wrote:

Why do some of my fellow citizens believe that they have the “right” to my property I’d totally beyond me. My father worked for a company who paid the same salary to all those in the same position. My parents lived beneath their means in order to save money for their old age, so as not to need to bother anybody and to take care of themselves.They chose to invest their after tax savings in income property which they paid off over 30+ years of working and proper budgeting. Others in the same company chose to spend all their money by living in nicer homes, taking expensive vacations, buying new cars and so on. Now my parents are “evil” and “selfish” and “not paying their fair share” (by just taking care of themselves?) and even “idiot” (by poster Doc00001!). I could return fire with a few of my choice insults but would rather ask you posters above why my parents are deserving of your scorn and extortion of their property? Perhaps you are descendants of some of their colleagues who spent every penny they earned and are now jealous or covetous and incapable of accumulating for yourself except by the old fashioned way: plunder. If they had not been long-sighted and prudent there would not be anything for you to even covet? I made mistakes in MY life but never did I expect my choices to be your obligation.

Dec 16, 2012 2:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
fromthecenter wrote:

It will drop down to 500k which was the goal all along. We have to commit to the same amount of spending cuts as well. I’d like to start with the our military budget. I’m sure just cutting the waste would be a good start. Then we can cut all the non-essentials that our govt waste on a daily basis. How about a good look at all the benefits the congress and presidents (both past and present) get for a few years of ‘so called’ public service? We can surely cut alot of money without putting the old and sick on the chopping block. The problem with these tax cuts is they will make up for it with tax loopholes. That needs to be addressed in a long term tax reform that should follow.

Dec 16, 2012 2:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
usagadfly wrote:


Have you ever drawn a paycheck? If you have, you paid Federal taxes on income (i.e. FICA taxes) in addition to Federal Income Tax, which is just an additional Federal tax on income, including Income Tax on the money paid for FICA. This is the law and has been since the 1930′s in the USA.

The rich pay far less than advertised, and far, far less than 70% of “the taxes” paid in this country. FICA taxes alone account for 42% of Federal revenue, and that is not counting the Income Tax levied on the FICA tax. It is all a fraud, a swindle because people think Federal taxes on income are only “Income Tax” while the FICA tax revenue is 90% as large as the separate “Income Tax” that is cited. And that does not even begin to count Federal excise and gas taxes, or State and Local Sales Taxes.

This whole issue demonstrates clearly the lack of honesty in the last election, and is certainly a factor in the rejection of the Republican Party’s alternative to Obama. Why would you trust someone who tried to trick you out of money? The issue needs to be honestly presented instead of sold through deception. So over the cliff we go, for better or for worse.

Dec 16, 2012 2:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
espy wrote:

usagadfly: Republicans starting wars? Who went into Libya? Which President decided bringing us into more combat zones then any other was a smart idea? It wasn’t either Bush, by the way. Republicans, unlike Democrats prefer to end things conclusively instead of breaking a house and leaving it broken. Which is precisely what Clinton did with sending servicemen into so many separate combat zones. And man can I smell the anti-antisemitism from my screen just reading the first paragraph of your post. Seriously, “Jewish ethnic domination” where do you come up with that? What one Party has done is increase the debt and continue the groundless belief that one can spend their way out of debt. If you’re in debt do you go to lavish restaurants or buy expensive things? No you save your money. You cut spending where you can. You don’t keep spending it like its water and you’re dieing of thirst. But that is exactly what’s happened. And now people like you blame the rich? Did the rich decide that the smart thing to do was spend, spend, spend? No it was the government, a Democrat controlled government.

You’re very naive when it comes to financial matters. You talk as if “providing basic health care and old age support” is a cheap thing. Wanna know how much it would cost for Obamacare to be feasible? The GDP would have to increase by 7% annually. Wanna know how much its increased annually recently? Barely 1%. So yeah, keep upping taxes on the rich. Its not like they’re going to run out of money. Oh, wait yes it is. Sooner or later, they’re business’s are going to be going into the red due to how much the government is taxing them, and the rich, those evil, evil people that do things like invest in companies and the like will think to themselves why keep spending money here when the returns just plain suck.

So go on keep increasing taxes on the rich. I mean its almost 50% already, when one takes into account federal and state, but what’s taking a little more. I mean its not like any of the middle or low incomers really depend on the private sector jobs created by the rich.

Dec 16, 2012 2:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DHuopana wrote:

The presidents and members of Congress we elect have a fiscal responsibility to levy sufficient taxes to fund the spending they deem necessary. Moreover, they are elected to lead the government of the world’s richest country which should be expected to be debt-free and not the world’s superborrower.

Instead, for decades our elected leaders have been repeatedly committing fiscal misfeasance/malfeasance by increasing spending while cutting taxes and funding resulting budget deficits by borrowing. The result of such fiscal misconduct: a daily-growing $16.4 trillion of taxpayer-owed debt (aka postponed taxes).

The never necessary debt is expensive, probably costing $475-$500 billion in interest in f/y 2013 even at today’s artificially low interest rates. Moreover, the debt’s annual interest will keep increasing as the debt increases, and even multiply as interest rates inevitably must return to more normal levels.

Yet, the ‘fiscal cliff” discussion to date ignores the need to cap the debt ASAP by eliminating the debt-increasing budget deficits by a date certain. Indeed, the elusive “compromise” both sides are seeking, will only reduce, not eliminate, budget deficits over the next ten years – and, therefore, will allow the debt (and its legal ceiling) to continue growing to (when?).

Until our elected leaders establish and begin implementing a viable complete how-and-when plan that will both balance the budgets and pay down the debt, they will be continuing to commit misfeasance/malfeasance which begs the question: How much longer will we the people – and bond investors and credit rating agencies – allow such fiscal misconduct?

Dec 16, 2012 3:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PV1 wrote:

There is no way possible to generate the revenues required to eliminate deficit spending from income taxes alone. Raising the top two rates back to what they were under Clinton will only produce around $80 billion, enough to offset the deficit for only eight days! The lower income rates being returned to what they were under Clinton will add another $378 billion (I thought Bush’s rate reductions only gave tax cuts to the rich??).

If you confiscate ALL of the income of the top two rates you will fund the deficit for around 5 months.

Clearly, the next move by the treacherous and vindictive progs will be to start taxing existing and accumulated wealth. Once that starts we will be in an irreversible economic death spiral as we start to cannibalize our own prosperity. Progressives are insane.

Dec 16, 2012 3:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Thomas1953 wrote:

I don’t know why they want to overtax the wealthy. I have never seen a poor person stay a business or give anyone a job. The problem is not that we need to tax more, it is that the government is spending too much. Cut spending, cut spending cut spending! As for the government healthcare, it is not the federal government’s job. It is just something to grow government and make it more intrusive and controlling.

Dec 16, 2012 3:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bobber1956 wrote:

It is clear now. The obstructionist is obama. Always has been. This economy and the coming recession/depression and collapse of the American economy is on his head alone. Not the Republicans, not the Democrats…obama. As soon as you libs recognize this evil for what it is and rid yourselves of it the sooner this country can begin to heal and recover.

Dec 16, 2012 4:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Obama will never reciprocate once he gets what he wants. The compromise has to be a package deal, not something done piecemeal.

Dec 16, 2012 4:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
44Guyton wrote:

I find the obvious Democrat/Obama supporters comments instructive and consistant. I read that Republicans are “rich” , “greedy” and blindly support the evil Jewish domination of the Middle East. One might get the impression that Democrats are poor people struggling against the evil establishment and Jews.
Maybe these same people might look at the U.S. Congress. Seven of the ten wealthiest in Congress are Democrats. Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt are all Democrats and liberal. Schmidt in fact has been squirreling million tax free (legal) offshore accounts. Incidentally 70% of Jewish voters vote Democrat. Most hypocritical are the wealthy Hollywood types that are overwhelmingly Democrat.
So when the average “low information” Democrat voter starts whining about “rich” evil businesses people maybe you should look at the POWER within the Democrat party that feed the “low information” voter a load of misinformation.

Dec 16, 2012 4:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
tols wrote:

LOL. Well we are living under a defacto dictatorship now. So I guess you republicans better roll over like a bunch of beta dogs. BTW, you all are a disgrace to the memory of all those who died ‘to stop the spread of communism.’ The country has been overthrown while you beltway repubs are playing right along.

Dec 16, 2012 4:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cebva wrote:

Don’t you dunderheads get it? Owebama has no intention of making a deal. He wants the across-the-board tax hikes so he can get the revenue and blame the tax hikes on the Republicans. He wants the automatic cuts to defense because the military is of no concern to him. He wants cuts to Medicare to drive more people to OweBamaCare. He wants cuts to Social Security so he can “rescue” it by appropriating everyone’s IRAs and 401Ks in the system.

This guy is diabolical, dangerous and deceitful. Welcome to the fundamental transformation of America.

Dec 16, 2012 4:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
StevePVB wrote:

Boehner needs to call a prime time press conference, be sure all the media is there, then make a simple statement: “Obama, Pelosi, Reid — Pound Sand. Make no mistake — the country will support me on this. Even you kool-aid drinkers have the ability to recognize obstructionism”.

Dec 16, 2012 4:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse

OK, Mr. Boehner, You made a good faith offer to one who has no faith. Step back and resubmit the original bill that contains no tax increases for anybody. Send that up to the Senate and wait; it’s their move.

Dec 16, 2012 4:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse

The government created this mess. Now it’s time to scare all of the sheeple into thinking the sky is falling. IMHO, there never was any plan to accept a deal by the pres and his cronies. But, we can’t waste this crisis now can we? This way he gets to raise taxes on the whole country and blame the stupid republicans.

“I swear by my life, and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”

Dec 16, 2012 5:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
smok3r wrote:

billpr you are a lemming. This economic mess was caused by Democrats in the 90s …not tax cuts. Tax cuts saved us from a recession at the end of Clintons term. The housing crash caused this mess with the affordable housing act in the 90s that allowed everyone to get a home loan regardless on credit or having any money to put down. Then the repeal of the glass/steigel act by Clinton that was put in place after the great depression to keep commercial and investment banks separate lead to the sub-prime loans and rates reset during Bush causing the collapse. Bush and McCain warned it would happen.
You libs always do that… put a policy in place that screws the country then blame it the other party. Same with the ACA… all the bad stuff like numerous taxes was set to kick in after the election and into 2016 so when the economy tanks again you can make up its the republican policies. You libs are a bunch of dopes that screw up everything you touch.
BTW lower taxes do increase revenue… research about how that happens rather then spew the lib talking points.

Dec 16, 2012 5:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jlmr wrote:

Of course Obama won’t accept this offer. It’s a case of bait and switch. During the campaign Obama talked about taxing millionaires and billionaires, but he didn’t mean it. Millionaires and billionaires could never provide the revenues he wants. He is coming after the middle class.

Dec 16, 2012 5:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
GozieBoy wrote:

Where is Obama’s proposal? Why does he insist on taking all Americans over the cliff, regardless of what is put before him? He is once again leading from behind. Reps should stop NOW. They are simply negotiating against themselves, with an EMPTY CHAIR on the other side.

Dec 16, 2012 6:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
robertoh wrote:

The Republicans should call a News Conference giving out the details of the Tax hikes for the rich and the Spending cuts expected from Obama and tell the nation that’s all the Rupublicans will present,and it’s now up to the President to make a move.If the WhiteHouse says no again the Republicans should just walk away and go home for the Holidays.

Dec 16, 2012 6:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
StevePA wrote:

Obama is not going to accept ANY offer unless it’s what he wants. That’s what he calls “negotiating” and “giving a bit” to get a law passed. The GOP should just let all the tax cuts expire because that’s what Obama has wanted all along. And then let him own it. And then the GOP can prove that increased taxes, in REALITY, kill the economy and reduce revenue. They don’t help the economy. The President has be lying on the whole subject. ALL the taxes he wants to impose only fund the Federal government for 8 DAYS! Obama loves this. If he stands firm and bankrupts the country, everyone will be dependent on the Federal government for their existence. And then the Federal government and all its bureaucracies can tell you how you will live, where you will live, where you can go, what you can drive, what you can eat, what kind of health care you are going to get, if any, what you can and cannot say, what is moral and what is immoral, who your friends will be, where you work, whether or not you can buy a home, whether or not you can go to college, whether or not you are going to be permitted to home school your children or send them to private school. If will be Obama’s Federal government and the regulatory agencies who will be making all these decisions for you whether you like it or not. And Obama LOVES IT! And there will be no one to appeal to. He will stack the Supreme Court in this term, try to stack Congress to get his way and perhaps a third term, and many Americans will be shocked that their life is no longer their own, and they’ve lost all their liberties and freedoms. Don’t laugh! This does not happen overnight! And Obama is smart! If he tried to do this all up front now, he’d be met with fierce resistance. But gradually over time when most Americans are not paying attention and just love this guy, he’ll easily be able to enact his agenda. Most Americans trust him. Big mistake. We can respect the office and the man and pray for the man. But trust him when his agenda is quite clear and will destroy America? I don’t think so. Wake up America. You’ve lost your way and turned your back on God. And we are paying a terrible price, not just in the White House, but in our culture as a whole, which has become consistently violent because of America’s selfishness and lack of respect for law and any sense of morality that was handed down for over 200 years. Sad.

Dec 16, 2012 7:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Boehner should have been calling Obama’s bluff all along. The Fiscal cliff is the goal, not a deal. They don’t want to deal with the Republicans so they can blame them for the upcoming recession. It is politics as usual. We can not avoid the upcoming recession.

Dec 16, 2012 8:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MDABE80 wrote:

Now we knows where Obama REALLY sits. he wants ALL control including the right to NOT include the congress in his spending rampage. He endangers the US. Somehow, he must be stopped cold as he’s trying to take us to socialism. Hold tight R’s.

Dec 16, 2012 8:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

microbob said “Governments don’t create jobs, people do”. In November of 2005 the government created the Department of Homeland Security. Today the DHS employees 240,000 people and has an annual budget of $60B. So all evidence to the contrary. Government does create jobs. And this is why cutting Federal spending in this still fragile economy is so difficult. Because it WILL lead to higher unemployment. If you cut Defense spending, you impact all those contractors (they will lay off people). On the other hand, it is true that 66% of the jobs created in this country are consumer spending based. Solving our fiscal problems is much more complicated than some of believe (based on your posts). There’s no way out of this mess that doesn’t involve pain for EVERYONE!

TheNewWorld…I have agreed with many of your posts of late. But not your last one.

Dec 16, 2012 11:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
nixonfan wrote:

Here is the test to see if anyone in Congress is serious about deficit reduction: will they rescind the spending sequestration or let it go through? If they rescind it, it means that Congress will never ever cut spending, and the rating should not be AAA.

Dec 17, 2012 12:07am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

TheNewWorld wrote:
“We can not avoid the upcoming recession.”

Another Chicken Little the-sky-is-falling argument. When will you Republicans stop scare-mongering?

The only thing that will send the US back into recession is the spending cuts that your party wants. There is no connection, no correlation, no sequence of cause and effect, between raising taxes on the wealthy and economic performance. None at all.

This is why Obama, who understands economics much better than any member of your party, resists spending cuts and he is completely right to do so. Cutting spending when the economy is weak is stupidity, and the results of such stupidity can be seen in Europe.

More to the point… Obama doesn’t need to cave in to Republican demands. He can ignore them, let the country go over this ‘cliff’ that Republicans created, and then present bills to reduce taxes on the middle-class and increase military spending. Sure, your party may be childish enough to block them out of spite, but even if they do that Obama wins in political terms.

Just accept reality – you right-wingers have been soundly beaten on this one. Boehner is clutching at straws now.

Dec 17, 2012 12:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Abulafiah…first let me state that I’m an Independent…and 2nd you are wrong. Bill Clinton said it best..if we don’t deal with the debt, it will deal with us. If Congress does not show meaningful spending cuts the rating agencies have already stated they will down grade our credit rating. What that means is we will pay more for the money we borrow. Making it even harder to deal with our debt and the interest will eat up more of the GDP.

Dec 17, 2012 8:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

xyz2055 … first, the US can borrow from the Fed at next to zero interest. Second, paying down debt is all well and good – when the economy is strong. Republicans should have done that instead of making it 89% larger…

Only a fool cuts spending when the economy is weak, because that leads to recession. Look at Europe for proof. There are a whole load of countries who cut spending, killed growth, and are still see-sawing between recession and stagnation.

Dec 17, 2012 8:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
Doc00001 wrote:

@ Corker& Flayer
You fellows apparently have a reading disorder. When it comes to living deep within my means, I’ll bet none of you can come close to my abilities in that area. I am head of household of a family of four and eat well, sleep indoors and am comfortable spending $400 per month to provide for all needs. So, don’t tell me about conservatism!
The most painful aspect of living is when the Govt coerces me to spend money on things I don’t use.

Somehow, you have conflated my sense of modesty and social conscience with parasitic behavior. I assure you, that is not the case. I simply believe that on a level playing field, the government wouldn’t be bending over backwards to force money into circulation by the consumer while not giving a thought to the trillions being sat upon by the very very few. ……. No one hires anyone because they have plenty of cash,,, they hire because they have work which needs doing. I’m sick of watching the Republicans deify money while allowing people to become sick and dying and live in poverty in the wealthy man’s pursuit of riches.

Oh yeah,, working men and women add value to products and services. The fat bastard on top of the heap merely finds ways to run off with the real paycheck. Yeah,,it’s those greedy blue collar guys who burden businesses unreasonably. When we live in a world where the lady who cleans the hotel room could never afford to sleep there,,,,that ain’t right!

Dec 17, 2012 8:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
GA_Chris wrote:

This is easy to solve. Just double the minimum wage.

That would cause all the working poor on welfare to be taken from recipients to tax payers, and would also remove the HUGE subsidy that the gov gives large companies by supplying healthcare and food stamps to their employees.

Dec 17, 2012 9:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
GA_Chris wrote:

@ Doc00001…. I agree.. the current republican party does not represent hard work and diligence, but just the interests of a few very wealthy people.

I am still waiting for someone who is truly conservative and does not believe in government subsidies to step forward (you can subsidize the poor via “entitlements”, or the rich via tax breaks and lower rates on capital income – both are WRONG)

Dec 17, 2012 9:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Abulafiah…the Fed doesn’t have the kind of money the U.S. needs to sustain their debt. The zero percent interest rate is for Banks. What the banks in this country do is, borrow from the FED (who simply prints more money) then takes that money and walks over to the Treasury and buys treasury notes, that you and I pay for the interest on. Loans to finance the U.S. debt comes from the sale of U.S. Department of the Treasury notes. The Fed has zero control over the Dept of the Treasury. This is why China (not the Fed) is the largest buyer of U.S./ debt. The PIIGS are in trouble because they waited too long to deal with their debt. Greece in particular.

Dec 17, 2012 9:27am EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Abulafiah…Obama is offering to cut spending as part of the deal to avoid the fiscal cliff.

Dec 17, 2012 9:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
actnow wrote:

Our debt and deficit issue will never be solved without some restructuring of the massive entitlement system as a corner stone of a solution. Finally, the Republicans are willing to compromise on the tax issue for the wealthy, but the President and Democrats must be willing to budge on entitlement reform if those very programs (and our nation) are to remain viable into the future. Please Mr. President….deal with the tough choices and lead!

Dec 17, 2012 10:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

actnow..well said.

Dec 17, 2012 3:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:


You are watching too much Fox, or reading too many right-wing blogs, because you are factually wrong on two counts, and on both points you are wrong because you are trotting out the Republican line.

First, China is not the largest buyer of US debt. Not by a long way. the largest buyer of US debt is the Social Security Trust Fund, who hold around $2.4 trillion. China holds around $1.164 trillion – less than half of the SSTF holding.

Second, Europe did not – and does not – have a debt problem. EU debt is limited to 60% of GDP, and Spain in 2007 had a debt level of around 40% of GDP. If you think that is the cause of Europe’s problems, please explain how a debt level of 40% of GDP can be a crisis.

Generally, you are (like most posters in here who read right-wing blogs and think it is reference) failing to distinguish between public holdings and intergovernmental holdings. Around $4.7 trillion, one third of that debt the GOP get all excited about (but didn’t when GWB was breaking all records for increasing it…), is owed by the US government to…. the US government.

Of the remaining public debt, 52% is held by US entities, the biggest (21%) being the Federal Reserve. The remaining 48% of public debt (not ‘the debt’, note..) is foreign owned, and only then is China “the largest buyer of US debt” as the right-wing constantly, and wrongly, asserts. The $1.164 trillion held by China is only slightly larger than the $1.119 trillion held by Japan, but I don’t hear the right-wing howling about that…

Dec 18, 2012 2:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
Abulafiah wrote:

actnow wrote:
“Our debt and deficit issue will never be solved without some restructuring of the massive entitlement system as a corner stone of a solution.”

You too are lapping up mis-information spread by the right-wing.

The Social Security Trust Fund that you are trying to blame for the debt, is actually running at a surplus and will do for the next 20 years. Calling it ‘entitlement’ when it isn’t, and suggesting that it is a drain on government resources, is just an excuse for right-wing ideology.

As it is running a surplus, cutting SS makes no financial sense at all. Republican are just keeping the faith with there archaic ideology.

Dec 18, 2012 2:30am EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Obama wants to raise everyone’s taxes and then blame it on the Republicans. That is the goal, watch and see.

Dec 19, 2012 4:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Obama wants to raise everyone’s taxes and then blame it on the Republicans. That is the goal, watch and see.

Dec 19, 2012 4:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
ccharles wrote:

Its good to see the Majority of the people somewhat on the same page and the bs from washington is just that… bs.

Obama hasnt made a spending request, which when approved by congress becomes the “federal Budget” since he has been in office. Im not sure if they have audited the federal coffers since he has been in. Each year we have made it through on a hodgepodge of appropreation bills that congress has to work out. The Sequester Act, or budget control act or the sequester and transprency act of 2012, what ever you call it was one law they made so they could spend more money, thats the spending cuts they want to rehash and lump in with the bush tax cuts. Will be too funny when they check the coffers and they no longer have medicare or medicaid or Soc. Sec.. Who they gonna blame? The CBO Im sure.

Dec 19, 2012 7:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
paintcan wrote:

The Republican stand is like the first class passengers on the Titanic that insisted that the class distinctions remained even as the tub sank.

Having large incomes seems to translate into having large incomes regardless of qualifications. The reverse is also true.

The wealthiest upper tiers are not the job creators or the innovators. They are only the dominators and controllers.

In the glory days of American growth – the late 19th century that Reagan seemed to recall and the days when there were no income taxes – the wealthy weren’t the inventors of new processors or industries: it was the middle class.

The USA will eat itself alive now as the wealthy tiers try to preserve their standards of living and even increase it, while the rest sink. All levels are becoming armed and dangerous. The government will continue to become a police state; all the while covertly aiding showy “democratic springs” elsewhere to export “democratic” principals that no longer really apply to the homeland. The principals aren’t nearly as important as the instability they create in potential economic and military rivals.

When a spark is lit – the whole country will explode in a conflagration that will leave the house of cards it has become nothing but ashes. I figure a war with Iran will be that spark. When it has been burned to the ground; that is when there will be a chance of remaking the country on a more equal and democratic footing. The USA is one of the few countries in the last 100 years that hasn’t been through the hell of social and military turmoil. I can’t help but think it’s time is long overdue.

The Department of Homeland Security was not built to protect this country from foreign terrorists. It was built to protect itself from internal upheaval.

Dec 19, 2012 12:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jrj906202 wrote:

Just let this play out the way it’s supposed to.Let’s go off the cliff and see if everyone,who voted for Obama,is happy to pay for the big govt Obama wants.This nonsense of the sainted middle/lower classes wanting big govt and not wanting to pay for it,should end.

Dec 20, 2012 11:41am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.