Senate Passes Bill To Avert Fiscal Cliff

[Gmash]

House to vote today or tomorrow.

http:// http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/12/31/obama-congress-fiscal-cliff-taxes/1799927/

Seems like a cop-out deal, does basically not much and kicks the can down the road as usual.

 

[Speed Daemon]

It's sad that the heavily covered "fiscal cliff" is just an opening act for the much more serious debt ceiling crisis. The Republicans in Congress don't show any sign of mending their ways, so we are in great risk of having them sabotage it again this year. Even though it's a not very useful formality, as long as it must be done, Congress must do it. Allowing the nation to fail is simply not an option.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Pushing the deadline 2 months down the road? Christ.

This is the best argument for Parliamentary Democracy I have ever seen. What absolute madness.

 

[A.Nonymous]

There's fault on both sides. The Democrats haven't put the Republicans in a very good spot. If the Republicans refuse to make concessions then they are stubborn and putting their own needs above the needs of the country. If Republicans make concessions then they are limp wristed panty waists who have no business running the country as they have no backbone or morals. This is exactly what the Democrats want.

 

[Bearcats]

There's fault on both sides. The Democrats haven't put the Republicans in a very good spot. If the Republicans refuse to make concessions then they are stubborn and putting their own needs above the needs of the country. If Republicans make concessions then they are limp wristed panty waists who have no business running the country as they have no backbone or morals. This is exactly what the Democrats want.

I agree Republicans are in a bad spot, but when "they" have people saying they will bring up charges on people that vote for increasing taxes...thats just blind. I am appalled in general at both parties inability to actually get something worked out versus just throwing political barbs and crossing their hands in a huff.

I think we the people should be allowed to REMOVE the entire house/senate whatever. These political lifers are a true issue. And while I have not been able to validate it; it appears they also voted themselves a pay increase during all of this.

 

[Gmash]

The bill does cancel their pay raise at least.

 

[Bearcats]

The bill does cancel their pay raise at least.

I hope so! A pay raise in this time of pure garbage and inability to play nice together would just spit in the face of the American voters...

 

[ElasticNinja]

I think we the people should be allowed to REMOVE the entire house/senate whatever.

I dont think so. There are enough problems as is with elections occurring too often. I say hold the elections for President, the House and Senate, in their entirety, at the same time, every four years.

I am appalled in general at both parties inability to actually get something worked out versus just throwing political barbs and crossing their hands in a huff.

See the problem is that it shouldn't be both parties. It should be the party with the most seats combining with a few independents.

The Democrats and Republicans are too far apart for a Grand Coalition, and that goes for negotiating the budget with each other too.

 

[A.Nonymous]

To be completely fair to the Dems, they are doing exactly what their base wants them to do. If the situation was reversed, the Republicans would be doing the same.

 

[Gmash]

Of course, now the House Republicans are trying to sabotage the bill.:banghead:

 

[Bob Maxey]

I think we the people should be allowed to REMOVE the entire house/senate whatever. These political lifers are a true issue. And while I have not been able to validate it; it appears they also voted themselves a pay increase during all of this.

So what do we replace them with?

It will never happen, that is a fact.

 

[A.Nonymous]

Of course, now the House Republicans are trying to sabotage the bill.:banghead:

Which is exactly what their base wants them to do.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Which is exactly what their base wants them to do.

Thats why there is representative politics, not direct democracy.

 

[Gmash]

Well, they managed to pass it anyway, for what its worth. Only reason I can see for this "deal" is to keep the markets from freaking out, otherwise, it really accomplishes nothing. If anything the republicans got the best of this deal. Obama has yet to grow a pair.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Using 250k as a negotiating tactic was stupid anyway. He should have said 120k and negotiate it up to maybe 180-200k.

I mean who actually earns that much money?

 

[A.Nonymous]

Using 250k as a negotiating tactic was stupid anyway. He should have said 120k and negotiate it up to maybe 180-200k.

I mean who actually earns that much money?

Quite a few households earn $120k.

 

[cjr72]

Using 250k as a negotiating tactic was stupid anyway. He should have said 120k and negotiate it up to maybe 180-200k.

I mean who actually earns that much money?

The thing is Obama's rhetoric was about raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires. Starting at 250k was already stretching that definition.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Quite a few households earn $120k.

I was on about $250k, but even with regards to $120k like...

The thing is Obama's rhetoric was about raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires. Starting at 250k was already stretching that definition.

I dont give a crap about his rhetoric. What I care about is economics and socioeconomic conditions in general. The first thing that should have happened when the recession hit should have been increasing taxes on these people to reduce it for the people who spend most of their income.

 

[cjr72]

I dont give a crap about his rhetoric. What I care about is economics and socioeconomic conditions in general. The first thing that should have happened when the recession hit should have been increasing taxes on these people to reduce it for the people who spend most of their income.

Broader economics aside my point about his rhetoric is that it is obvious his administration felt it was politically necessary to sell the tax increase as something targeted at the rich. Besides 250k wasn't just an opening bid, he specifically campaigned on 200k individual / 250k household for his reelection. Going for 120k would break a campaign promise.

 

[Speed Daemon]

The thing is Obama's rhetoric was about raising taxes on millionaires and billionaires. Starting at 250k was already stretching that definition.

Now that the definition of a millionaire is someone who has an income of at least $1,000,000/year, taxing at $250,000/year is only 25% of the limit. How is that stretching? It's not even pushing the limit.

 

[Speed Daemon]

Folks, this was just the warmup act. The debt ceiling has been kicked down the road for only a couple of weeks, and the Republicans are promising to throw the US sovereign debt into default (and the world into a full-blown depression) in the name of ideals that have done terrible things over the years.

Paying the minimum payments on our sovereign debt isn't optional. It's NOT a "credit card for the President", as some GOP lawmakers (who are lying) claim. This is accumulated debt from many Congresses past, although the bulk of it came from borrowing money at high interest rates to fund Gulf War II, while simultaneously lowering taxes during wartime. That was the bone-headed decision that our children's children will continue to pay long after we're dead, and that's the best-case scenario!

Are we going to let a bunch of wealthy politicians crash America, or will we fight back?

 

[A.Nonymous]

Now that the definition of a millionaire is someone who has an income of at least $1,000,000/year, taxing at $250,000/year is only 25% of the limit. How is that stretching? It's not even pushing the limit.

Defining millionaires based on income and not actual wealth is ridiculous right there.

 

[ElasticNinja]

Defining millionaires based on income and not actual wealth is ridiculous right there.

To be fair, people still think of millionaire in old dollar terms. Millionaires these days are paupers compared to those of the 20s, or even the 50s. Devaluation.

 

[A.Nonymous]

To be fair, people still think of millionaire in old dollar terms. Millionaires these days are paupers compared to those of the 20s, or even the 50s. Devaluation.

True. But measuring based on income and not actual wealth is still ridiculous.

 

[pbf98]

I read somewhere that this was a 154 page document that the senators signed after only receiving it 3 minutes earlier.. is that really enough time for them to decide its a good plan? sure I know they were cutting it close for time, but 3 minutes to review 154 page document?? How is that enough time to even read the first few pages? Its not like this is the Apple iTunes terms that comes up every week when you need to update iTunes. I just don't see how they think it is acceptable to pass something they didn't even read if it is true..