Posted by Tina
At the final hour Congress passed the legislation to avoid the cliff. ALL taxpayers will see higher taxes EXCEPT Obama’s big money supporters who get an extension of their tax loophole breaks. That would be Hollywood and Silicon Valley. The Social Security tax comes to an end and taxes on persons making $400-450K will be higher, taxes on dividends and interest go up, and the death tax rate goes up.
Two million people on unemployment will be forced to continue living off the government; unemployment benefits were extended again, the Democrat jobs solution.
People who like dairy can breathe a sigh of relief until September; dairy subsidies were extended as prices were expected to double.
Congress CANCELLED its pay raise to appease angry voters.
Dissenting Republican opinion was best expressed by retiring Rep. Steven C. LaTourette (R-Ohio), “We should not take a package put together by a bunch of sleep-deprived octogenarians on New Year’s Eve.” That was a direct hit on the old white guy Reid, leader of the Senate. Boehner is said to have uttered the F word in parting.
The American people did not realize ONE SINGLE DIME IN SPENDING CUTS.
The bill drew 85 votes from Republicans and 172 from Democrats, meaning well more than half of its support came from the Democratic minority.
With 151 Republicans voting “no,” the GOP tally fell far short of a majority of the GOP caucus. That broke a long-standing preference by Boehner to advance only bills that could draw the support of a majority of his Republican members.In a sign of the moment’s gravity, Boehner himself cast a rare vote: He supported the bill. So did Rep. Paul Ryan (Wis.), the GOP’s vice-presidential candidate last year, who parted ways from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a potential 2016 presidential contender, who voted against the measure.
But other top GOP leaders voted no, including Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.) and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (Calif.).
THE PRESIDENT HAS GONE BACK TO HAWAII!
Why did he bother spending more taxpayer money to come back to Washington since HE DIDN’T SIGN the legislation?
New cliff fights await us. Geitner already announced that we reached the debt ceiling limit as of December 31st. The President wants the ceiling eliminated so he can have an open-ended credit card and unlimited spending authority.
President Obama’s approval rating from Gallup on his handling of the economy has hit a
NEW LOW of 26%.
The stock market is up; certainty about taxes is better than uncertainty and BIG corporations can now plan. The big guys can afford the rate changes but the change will
produce a 1% -1.2% drag on the economy.
Republicans will continue to attract the focus of the nations ire even though this is not their plan. Americans have a crazy method for finding fault. We have just been run over by a truck and the people will blame the police officer attempting to direct traffic away from them instead of the idiot behind the wheel determined to run over them.
Oh well as they say, elections have consequences.
Tina: “At the final hour Congress passed the legislation to avoid the cliff. ALL taxpayers will see higher taxes EXCEPT Obama’s big money supporters who get an extension of their tax loophole breaks.”
Well, not “all,” but about 77% of Americans will pay more in Social Security payroll taxes due to the expiration of the payroll tax holiday. If you recall, President Obama was actually a strong advocate of this tax cut, which was enacted in 2011 and later extended through the end of 2012. Unfortunately, extending it another year was not a priority for either party, so we will now be paying the same rate in payroll taxes which we payed two years ago.
Interestingly, the payroll tax holiday was criticized by numerous Republican politicians and pundits who claimed, contrary to the findings of most economists, that it did not stimulate the economy or help middle-class workers. These critics included Rep. Paul Ryan, Rep. Michelle Bachmann, Sen. John Kyl, Sen. Orrin Hatch, Michelle Malkin, Dana Perino, Gretchen Carlson, and Stuart Varney.
http://politicalcorrection.org/mobile/factcheck/201112120007
http://mediamatters.org/research/2011/12/21/tax-cut-crusader-varney-supports-the-wrong-tax/185616
http://mediamatters.org/research/2011/09/08/memo-to-gretchen-carlson-economists-say-cutting/182685
http://mediamatters.org/research/2011/12/09/conservative-media-mock-obama-for-pointing-out/185092
No doubt many of these same people will now turn around and blame Obama for not extending a tax cut they initially opposed. Indeed, Gretchen Carlson and Dana Perino have already done exactly that.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2011/12/19/fox-news-calls-for-yearlong-payroll-tax-cut-ext/185496
“Two million people on unemployment will be forced to continue living off the government; unemployment benefits were extended again, the Democrat jobs solution.”
First of all, in what way are people on unemployment being “forced” to live off the government? Unemployment benefits are not mandatory; unemployed individuals can choose to take them or not. Wasn’t it you who said, just yesterday, that no one can “force” someone to take a job they do not want? If that is true, then it must also be true that a person cannot be forced to receive unemployment benefits. By your own logic, they could just choose to get a job instead. Your statements are not consistent with one another.
Second of all, not only does extending unemployment benefits stimulate the economy, it is the *highest scoring policy* on the CBO’s list of policies that would increase economic growth. That’s because this policy is targeted toward those citizens who are most likely to spend additional income, and it reduces the cost to business of adding employees, the two main features of the CBO’s highest scoring policies.
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42717
Near the bottom of the CBO’s list? Reducing taxes on business income. Lower-scoring policies such as this one, according to the CBO, would “Primarily affect businesses’ cash flow but have little impact on their incentives to hire or invest.”
The “Democrat solution,” according to the CBO, is stimulative. Yours is not.
“Congress CANCELLED its pay raise to appease angry voters.”
Thank God. I think if there’s one thing we can both agree on, it’s that a pay raise for Congress should be out of the question at a time like this.
And Paul Ryan voted for this hosing. As usual.
To quote Erick Erickson at Redstate about Paul Ryan
“While in Congress, he voted for No Child Left Behind, the Prescription Drug Benefit, TARP, caps on CEO pay, the AIG bill, the GM bailout, the debt ceiling, and now the fiscal cliff. In fact, he is one of less than a dozen Republican congressmen to have voted for every bailout to come before Congress”
And Boehner blaming Reid for this? Don’t make me laugh. It is not the job of the Senate to fix the House’s mess. The Senate passed their bill in the summer, the House has been sitting on their thumbs for months. MONTHS.
After a year of doing no work, making $174,000 a year and following a very harsh one week on, two weeks off schedule, the house now has to hurry up and pass a bunch of stuff because they haven’t been doing any work at all. Boehner wouldn’t even bring bills to the floor for votes. I mean, it was only a few days ago that Boehner pulled his “Plan B.” He didn’t even let them vote on it.
Now we are all supposed to be worried that milk prices will skyrocket, that Hurricane Sandy disaster aid will not happen, Sequester, Debt Ceiling, etc. etc. These things could have all been avoided if they had decided to work instead of do nothing.
I expect nothing from Democrats and I stupidly expected something from Republicans. Today they all disgust me.
Chris: “Well, not “all,…”
The point of the statement you responded to is that taxes are not going up on Warren Buffet and others in his profession (asset wealthy category), green energy companies, certain rich donors in Hollywood, Silicon Valley and GE. Warren Buffet was shoved in front of camera’s to sell (fool the masses) this tax the rich “fix”. It has “fixed” nothing and the truly wealthy like Buffet will continue to pay less than his secretary. Buffet knew his wealth building capability would not be touched by the tax increase on the wealthy. Democrats only succeeded in blunting the ability of the well off to acquire wealth for futures and their retirements. An ignorant citizenry applauds.
“…the payroll tax holiday was criticized by numerous Republican politicians and pundits who claimed, contrary to the findings of most economists, that it did not stimulate the economy…”
It did not significantly stimulate the economy! Unemployment remains high, most businesses still have modest gains or losses, the stock market bumps along on shallow trading, growth has remained at a significantly low rate. The criticism was is that for little gain, the SS fund would take a hit at a time when baby boomers were set to start retiring. The argument is their are ways to create significant stimulus to the economy and Democrats want nothing to do with them. They prefer to cut revenue flows to programs while printing money that makes spending power for citizens worth less. There is no way to defend the cut to SS taxes except it temporarily gave citizens a few extra dollars to spend. People adjust to the net amount in their paychecks; they will miss this money and government accomplished almost nothing in exchange for the economy and created a deficit in the ss fund at the same time. I think that is STUPID.
“No doubt many of these same people will now turn around and blame Obama…”
It’s about time. For the reasons mentioned above it was a as stupid an idea as his cash for clunkers program.
“Unemployment benefits are not mandatory; unemployed individuals can choose to take them or not. Wasn’t it you who said, just yesterday, that no one can “force” someone to take a job they do not want? If that is true, then it must also be true that a person cannot be forced to receive unemployment benefits. By your own logic, they could just choose to get a job instead. Your statements are not consistent with one another.”
The use of the word force was unnecessary. My statement was made in the context of the minimum wage argument. We are living through unusual, and unnecessary, circumstances. People are still out of work because of the policies of the extreme redistribution progressives that in four years have not improved the economy. the government is, in effect, ensuring that opportunities for work and entrepreneurs are rare and very difficult for the unemployed. THIS SHOULD SMACK YOU IN THE FOREHEAD!
A better way to convey the point would be: Most of the two million unemployed will have no other option than to take extended unemployment benefits. The fact that there are two million unemployed and a very slow economy persists, pretty much assures that will be the only option for most.
” not only does extending unemployment benefits stimulate the economy…”
Yeah, about as well as that SS cut did. The economy has not been helped enough to improve the lives of our citizens that want to work or the companies that want to expand, grow and hire. A meager 1% to 2% growth will NOT make enough difference…including in terms of revenues flowing to government. How many years do we diddle around with these appeasement policies before the people get it. DEMOCRATS DON’T CARE WHETHER PEOPLE GET BACK TO WORK…THEY WANT POWER AND CONTROL.
“The “Democrat solution,” according to the CBO, is stimulative. Yours is not.”
“…it is the *highest scoring policy* on the CBO’s list of policies that would increase economic growth.”
No…it was the highest on a limited list. And it does NOT include changes in behavior. There was a report that the citizens were using the money to pay off debt not spending it which is what was expected and which is what the scoring policy was based upon. Since they paid off debt the economy was not stimulated significantly. Also, the list did not include policies that would do a better job of stimulating the economy.
Your web link also included this:
Progressive Democrats have no intention to offsetting actions which are reforms to entitlements and reductions in spending! As long as that continues the uncertainty and fear to risk will continue and the economy will go nowhere!
As long as progressive democrats are successful at fooling people with ridiculous class warfare soundbites and blame the republican excuses they will continue to rule over the American people and the American economy will look like France and Italy and eventually, we’ll be Greece.
Senator Sessions has wisdom for ears to hear in the video at the link you posted:
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/42717
Our readers would be wise to listen to the end.
Princess: “The Senate passed their bill in the summer”
The House passed a budget that included reforms that would have accomplished something significant, including avoiding this fiscal cliff mess, every year since republicans took control. The Senate has done zot!
“Boehner wouldn’t even bring bills to the floor for votes”
Boehner wouldn’t bring a bill that contained absolutely nothing republicans wanted. The bill that was proposed was designed so Boehner wouldn’t bring it to the floor…it was done on purpose so democrats could whine in front of the cameras.
Until the American people are willing to recognize and shame democrat dirty tricks nothing will change in Washington. Democrats ONLY play the game for more power and they gain power not by passing legislation that works and not by bipartisan cooperation for the good of the country but by demonizing and discrediting the opposition. Boehner is only the latest to be set up for attack. All of the problems have been shoved onto Boehner. Democrats get off scott free…democrats win and the American people are the losers.
“Today they all disgust me.”
They all disgust me too but I dare any republican or independent to come up with a plan to negotiate cooperation with progressive democrats. They are like terrorists; they do not cooperate in negotiations. They are playing a winner take all war to win permanent power in Washington…and somehow they are never targeted for responsibility or blame…the country loves them no matter how bad the economy under their control, no matter the failure is accomplished by both parties. ONLY republicans are held to account.
WHY DO DEMOCRATS ALWAYS GET A P-ASS…RECEIVE THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT…MANAGE TO AVOID DAMAGE FROM THEIR ACTIONS?
Tina: “The point of the statement you responded to is that taxes are not going up on Warren Buffet and others in his profession (asset wealthy category),”
What are you talking about? Taxes were raised on income, capital gains, and dividends for earners making over $400,000. That includes Warren Buffet.
“Democrats only succeeded in blunting the ability of the well off to acquire wealth for futures and their retirements. An ignorant citizenry applauds.”
The small increase in taxes on some of the top 2% that just passed does nothing of the sort. Somehow these wealthy citizens managed to do just fine during the Clinton years when their taxes were that high. Their ability to acquire wealth was not blunted then and it is not blunted now. But your concern for the well off as opposed to the poor and middle class is as touching as ever.
“It did not significantly stimulate the economy!”
The CBO says it did. Why should I believe you over them?
“There is no way to defend the cut to SS taxes except it temporarily gave citizens a few extra dollars to spend.”
…which is exactly what is required for an economic recovery to take place. More money for the average consumer to spend is of PARAMOUNT importance to economic recovery, since it produces more demand. Middle and lower class people spend much more of a percentage of their income than the wealthy do, thus any plan for recovery must revolve around consumer spending, not tax breaks and incentives for the wealthy to save and invest. This is Econ 101.
“For the reasons mentioned above it was a as stupid an idea as his cash for clunkers program.”
Then WHY did you just complain about payroll taxes going back up if you thought the initial cut was a bad idea? Wait, I know the answer: Because you have no principles.
I mean, the irony of this is astounding. You, of all people, are actually arguing against a tax cut! You are against it for the sole reason that President Obama was for it. It’s the individual mandate all over again. Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney both advocated an individual mandate as recently as 2008. But then when Obama adopted the idea, it became “socialism.”
Your party has no principles; you just decide to be against anything Obama is for. Your party made it clear upon Obama’s election that their main goal was not governance of the country, it was to get Obama out of office. Your party made it clear that they would not negotiate. For you to claim that the Democrats haven’t made an attempt to negotiate is atrociously dishonest. Obama made concession after concession to Republicans in crafting the health care bill, starting with the move away from a public option and adopting the individual mandate that had previously been supported by Gingrich, Romney, Orrin Hatch, and the Heritage Foundation. He made these concessions even though he didn’t have to, and they didn’t get him anywhere with the spoiled babies you voted into Congress. These people then turned against their own idea and tried to hide their previous support of it just for political convenience. That you bought this shows that you are so blindly adherent to party doctrine that you are willing to reject all common sense and reason in order to protect them from the slightest criticism.
“The use of the word force was unnecessary…A better way to convey the point would be: Most of the two million unemployed will have no other option than to take extended unemployment benefits. The fact that there are two million unemployed and a very slow economy persists, pretty much assures that will be the only option for most.”
But this still flies in the face of your repeated claims that I, and anyone else, can simply “get a job/get a better job” if we are unhappy with our current working conditions. So your positions are still not consistent with one another.
Unless you are now willing to admit that your previous comments to me, in which you rudely told me to get another job if I did not like the current minimum wage, were glib and unrealistic. That’s the only way to line up what you said yesterday with what you are saying today. You can’t simultaneously believe that anyone can get a good job in America if they try hard enough, AND believe that because of Obama and the Democrats, people have no choice but to take unemployment benefits. Well, you can believe both of those things at the same time, but not if you want to be a rational human being.
“No…it was the highest on a limited list.”
What else would you have included on the list that wasn’t already there? As I pointed out already, your big solution–lowering taxes on business owners–was on the list, and got a terrible score, because it does not actually have much effect on investment or hiring. The list may be “limited,” but it included your party’s main policy, and rejected it as ineffective.
“And it does NOT include changes in behavior. There was a report that the citizens were using the money to pay off debt not spending it which is what was expected and which is what the scoring policy was based upon. Since they paid off debt the economy was not stimulated significantly.”
Wait, you mean paying off debt doesn’t stimulate the economy? I’m shocked. Not at this argument, which is true, but at the fact that you are making it. You, who believe that lowering the national debt should be our number one priority, and that we should cut social welfare programs in order to do that. But you are right: This would not stimulate the economy. Consumer spending stimulates the economy. Demand stimulates the economy. Cutting social services won’t do that; it will only drive us into another recession as consumer spending and demand go down. Business doesn’t do well when there are no customers, Tina.
“Also, the list did not include policies that would do a better job of stimulating the economy.”
For instance?
Warren Buffet, and other very wealthy people don’t have earned income. (or if they do it’s a pittance) They will not pay more in taxes under higher income tax rates. Wealthy people will quit investing and put their money in Buffet’s companies product (hedgefund) and avoid taxes altogether. That’s why Buffet thinks its a great idea to raise the rates on earners in higher brackets. He looks like a good guy to the public because they have bought this tax ourselves to prosperity bull#*%# and because HE GETS WEALTHIER OFF THE MONEY THAT FLOWS TO HIS FIRM FROM OTHER WEALTHY PEOPLE! (He’s just part of the scam waged on the public) Wealthy people always avoid taxes…politicians always leave them an out. When tax laws become stupidly anti-investment they quit investing their money and put it on the sidelines in hedgefunds. A complicated accounting or regulatory law that has to do with “carried interest” is how they avoid taxes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carried_interest
If the law has changed on this loophole I haven’t heard about it.
Chris it isn’t the money it is the principle and the effectiveness of doing this. Our economy stinks. Higher tax rates will take money out of the economy. Our debt keeps growing. The revenues this tax will generate will mostly help pay interest on that debt. Since the progressive Democrats in power refuse to address unsustainable entitlement programs the problem will only get worse and with less money to tax generated in the private sector. The economy will not grow sufficiently to overcome problems…unemployment,wages increase, expansion of business, creation of new business. The bill just passed was a political win for progressives who are bound and determined to ruin the country through growing government, redistribution, and blunting private sector opportunity.
“The CBO says it did. Why should I believe you over them?”
The CBO said the economy would grow. The economy did grow but at a lousy 1-2%. That is not sufficient…it is not healthy. CBO only answers the questions they are asked.
CBO also commented thus: “…would produce short-term economic benefits—but without offsetting actions to reverse the accumulation of government debt, future output and future incomes would tend to be lower than they otherwise would have been.
“More money for the average consumer to spend is of PARAMOUNT importance to economic recovery…”
More money comes in many ways. 2 million people not making a “living wage” because they haven’t been able to find work amount to an incredible loss of buying power. Somehow in this narrow defense you seem to forget that. JOBS and full employment would generate more buying power and more revenue to government. At some point you are going to have to ask your self WHY this government has failed or refused to do what would put people back to work. One day you are going to have to face the reality that promises made in these entitlements cannot be sustained by taxpayers even at full employment. Poor people could be taken care of easily if able bodied people worked and saved for their own retirement and health care. Progressive government creates massive programs for a lot of people that don’t need it and in the process screw up the budget with massive debt and the economy with excessive rules, regulations, taxes and fees. You have broken the system for able bodied people and put downward pressure on the ability to help those in need.
Bah! It is worthless to try to explain this to you. You like centralized expensive government and you don’t give a damn what it does to your future.