Dems want to go over the fiscal cliff

[DarrinS]

They get everything they want: higher taxes, defense cuts, and the public will lay the blame on Republicans.

[boutons_deux]

Elections have consequences, so FUCK THE REPUGS and their defense of the 1%

[boutons_deux]

Ann Coulter Says GOP Should Give In To Obama On Taxes: 'We Lost The Election'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/06/ann-coulter-gop-taxes-obama-hannity_n_2249545.html?utm_hp_ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=120612&utm_medium=email&utm_content=NewsEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief



Top Two Percent To GOP: Tax Us

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/05/top-two-percent-tax_n_2245596.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=120612&utm_medium=email&utm_content=FeatureTitle&utm_term=Daily%20Brief

[Bill_Brasky]

Link to defense cuts? I highly doubt that happens.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Dems are just as much in bed (actually a little less) with the military industrial complex as the Republicans are, so I doubt defense cuts happen even though a lot of Dems want them.

:lol saying defense cuts like it's a bad thing
:lol Republicans wanting to bankrupt the country with defense spending to help :cryIsrael:cry

[boutons_deux]

The MIC, like Wall St, is untouchable.

[ElNono]

It's not like the "fiscal cliff" is a Dem invention. At some point not that long ago, the GOP agreed to this deal.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

The MIC, like Wall St, is untouchable.

I'd say it's several times as untouchable. There's a growing consensus among Americans about how unethical and corrupt Wall Street is, and we've seen recent bills like the Dodd-Frank Act passed to regulate Wall Street.

Meanwhile, there is only a handful of people in this country who have any idea how out of control our defense spending is while most Americans, both red team and blue team, have been brainwashed into thinking America needs to spend as much as it does on defense because of an Islamic boogeyman (like every Jew I know who's otherwise liberal). The military industrial complex and Big Pharma are the two industries that have both sides of Washington completely in their back pockets w/ barely any Americans having a clue about how corrupt they are.

[Winehole23]

At some point not that long ago, the GOP agreed to this deal.figuring that Obama would be a lame duck by now, so and would the Democratic majority in the Senate. didn't work out that way.

GOP has two options: meet the President halfway, in which case taxes go up. Or, give him the finger, in which case taxes still go up, and the public blames it for the ensuing mess.

First option appears to be less unpalatable.

[Winehole23]

writing's on the wall when Tom Coburn says stuff like this:


Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) said Wednesday that if Congress had to raise taxes, he’d prefer that it was done by raising tax rates as opposed to putting new limits on tax breaks and deductions. His comments were notable because they are starkly at odds with Republican leaders.


“Personally, I know we have to raise revenue,” Mr. Coburn said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe (http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/05/sen-coburn-joins-chorus-calling-for-wealthiests-tax-rates-to-go-up/). “I don’t really care which way we do it. Actually, I would rather see the rates go up than do it the other way because it gives greater chance to reform the tax code and broaden the base in the future.”


He made clear, though, that however taxes were raised, “it’s going to be a negative drag on the economy.”

[CosmicCowboy]

Unemployment and underemployment both jumped in November according to Gallup. Unemployment back over 8% and underemployment over 17%.

[Wild Cobra]

Unemployment and underemployment both jumped in November according to Gallup. Unemployment back over 8% and underemployment over 17%.
Both sides spend so much on campaigning. Makes sense.

[boutons_deux]

Obama's Tax Plan Would Spare Many Affluent Families

President Obama's insistence that marginal tax rates rise for families making more than $250,000 has convinced millions of affluent Americans that they are likely to be writing larger checks to the government next year.

But many of those families have no reason to fret.

A close look at the president's plan shows that a large majority of families making up to $300,000 - as well as hundreds of thousands of families with even larger incomes - would not pay taxes at a higher marginal rate.

Because the complexity of the tax code makes it difficult to draw clean lines, they are the beneficiaries of choices the administration has made to ensure that families earning less than $250,000 do not pay higher rates.

Some of those affluent households still would pay higher taxes next year under other parts of the president's tax plan and increases imposed by the Affordable Care Act, but not under the centerpiece, the part most frequently promote by the president and most bitterly opposed by Congressional Republicans.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/12/07/business/obamas-tax-plan-would-spare-many-affluent-families.xml;jsessionid=2715EF61E5BF5D6DD78DD13001 0E7A17?f=19

I'm rooting for the Repugs to push us over the cliff

and THEN

shutdown the govt over the deficit limit.

[CosmicCowboy]

I'm rooting for Boutons to get run over by a frac truck.

[TeyshaBlue]

trucked and untruckable, tbh.

[boutons_deux]

CC and TB jerking each other off

[DarrinS]

wO9jnq8pg28

[boutons_deux]

sure, roll all financial regs and tax rates back to 1980

abolish captial gains, all income taxed as regular/earned income

corporations to stop group insurance and pay the same amt as salary directly to employees

mortgage interest deduction capped beyond 2x the avg house price, indexed to region and inflation

kill the carried interest loophole

1% sales tax on all financial trades

[DarrinS]

^speaking of falling off a cliff

[CosmicCowboy]

sure, roll all financial regs and tax rates back to 1980

abolish captial gains, all income is taxes as regular/earned income

kill the carried interest loophole

1% sales tax on all financial trades

If you got elected I would assassinate you myself if someone didn't beat me to it.

[boutons_deux]

If you got elected I would assassinate you myself if someone didn't beat me to it.

typical right-winger/TV-show, murder solves all your problems. GFY

[TeyshaBlue]

I'm fascinated by masturbation!

[Nbadan]

Boutons needs to learn to avoid the spunk in wing-nut circle jerks....

[Latarian Milton]

fuck repugs for nominating a clown as their presidential candidate that never had any chance to beat obama

[Th'Pusher]

Watching the republicans come to terms with the fact that they have zero leverage in this negotiation is pure schadenfreude considering what petulant obstructionist bitches they've been as a collective for the last 4 years.

[Drachen]

Boutons needs to learn to avoid the spunk in wing-nut circle jerks....

This is probably the most damning post ever made on Spurstalk.

[Jacob1983]

Democrats oppose defense cuts because they love war and nation building just as much as Republicans and neo-cons. Democrats only oppose nation building and war when a Republican is president.

[Th'Pusher]

GOP Lacks Leverage, but It's Still Got Spin. (http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/110848/gop-may-lack-leverage-its-sure-got-spin)

[Winehole23]

Unemployment and underemployment both jumped in November according to Gallup. Unemployment back over 8% and underemployment over 17%.All Obama's fault, undoubtedly. President determines all on his own whether or not the private sector hires, right?

Market is null, President is everything, n'est-ce pas?

[CosmicCowboy]

All Obama's fault, undoubtedly. President determines all on his own whether or not the private sector hires, right?

Market is null, President is everything, n'est-ce pas?

Didn't say that, did I? Fucking anklebiter.

[Th'Pusher]

Unemployment and underemployment both jumped in November according to Gallup. Unemployment back over 8% and underemployment over 17%.
Don't get too excited, much of that data is storm related and will likely return next month.

[CosmicCowboy]

Labor department says 7.7


The U.S. economy created 146,000 new jobs and the unemployment rate slid to 7.7 percent, in a report much better than economists had expected.

Despite the effects from Superstorm Sandy, the jobs engine continued to run, albeit slowly.

The Labor Department said the storm's effects might be more accurately gauged in next months' report.

Internally, the report showed some weakness.

The numbers had some puzzling contradictions, particularly in its assertion that Sandy "did not substantively impact" the jobs count for November, and in substantial downward revisions from previous months.

Also, the drop in the unemployment rate appeared to reflect a continued exodus of workers from the labor force.

The labor force participation rate, already around 30-year lows, fell further in the month to 63.6 percent. That represented 350,000 fewer workers.

An alternative measure of unemployment, which counts those who have given up looking for jobs as well as those working part-time for economic reasons, also edged lower to 14.4 percent.

Economists had been expecting a gain of 93,000 in nonfarm payrolls and a steadying of the unemployment rate at 7.9 percent, though estimates varied widely.

Deutsche Bank's Joseph LaVorgna, for instance, forecast a gain of just 25,000 positions, due in large part to residual effects from Superstorm Sandy.

Market reserach firm TrimTabs, conversely, projected 202,000 new jobs, though it expected the government's count to be lower.

Previous month's employment gains also were lowered through revisions.

The Labor Department's initial report for October showed a gain of 171,000 jobs, but now is listed at 138,000. The September gain of 148,000 was taken down to 132,000.

Much of the November gains came in retail, which added 53,000, while professional services grew 43,000.

[Th'Pusher]

Labor department says 7.7
It upsets you that Obama's jobs engine continues to run, doesn't it?

[boutons_deux]

Remember a few weeks ago the Repugs were sticking Barry with exclusive responsibility for "23M un/underemployed", as if the Repugs actually GAF about jobs? :lol

[Drachen]

It upsets you that Obama's jobs engine continues to run, doesn't it?

without having read the full report yet, I heard on npr this morning that the drop this month was largely due to more people stopping their search for work.

[CosmicCowboy]

It upsets you that Obama's jobs engine continues to run, doesn't it?

Fuck you asshole. I just pasted the article for y'alls information without any editorial comment. You suck..

[coyotes_geek]

without having read the full report yet, I heard on npr this morning that the drop this month was largely due to more people stopping their search for work.

It's in the story CC quoted above.

146,000 new jobs created; 350,000 people leaving the work force.

[CosmicCowboy]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-07/146000-jobs-added-november-beat-expectation-85000-unemployment-rate-lower-77


Confused why the unemployment rate dropped? The same, favorite BLS adjustment - a drop in the labor force participation rate which declined by 0.2% to 63.6% once again, as the number of people out of the labor increased by over 540K to 88,883,000. In terms of quality of jobs, the biggest gain was in retail jobs as expected in part of the Thanksgiving rush, which added +53K jobs, Professional and Business services rose by 43K, of which Administrative and Waste Services was +23K, and Hospitality and Leisure +23K: all low paying jobs. Construction jobs lost: 20K.

[Th'Pusher]

Fuck you asshole. I just pasted the article for y'alls information without any editorial comment. You suck..
Calm down. I was just ribbing you a bit. Nobody is pretending like the economy is roaring and most people paying attention are aware the unemployment rate is dropping because people are leAving the workforce.

@ Drachen I heard that same report on NPR. Most of the growth was in retail and tourism/service (read low wage) and healthcare. At least all the money the government spends on healtcare continues to create jobs :lol

[boutons_deux]

Why Obama's approval rating is rising

Obama's approval rating stands at 57 percent, the highest since May 2011, when U.S. Navy SEALs (http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/U.S.+Navy+SEALs) killed the terror leader, and up 5 percentage points from before the election. And 42 percent say the country is on the right track, up from 35 percent in January 2009.

A majority think it's likely that the president will be able to improve the economy in his second term.

"Compared to the alternative, I'm more optimistic about government and the economy with him in office," said Jack Reinholt, an independent from (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2012/1107/Election-2012-12-reasons-Obama-won-and-Romney-lost)Bristol, R.I. (http://www.csmonitor.com/tags/topic/Bristol+%28Rhode+Island%29), who backed Obama in 2008 and again in 2012. "I feel he has the better path laid out."

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/1207/Why-Obama-s-approval-rating-is-rising?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feeds%2Fcsm+%28Christian+Scie nce+Monitor+|+All+Stories%29

There is no doubt the Repugs will do everything possible at Fed and state level (Repugs control 24 states, let's see how those state economies do) to increase austerity (cut spending) and increase poverty, and screw the 99%, while protecting/enriching the corps and 1%.

[coyotes_geek]

...........and boutons attempts to create a diversion...................

[boutons_deux]

Repugs will get overwhelmingly blamed for over the cliff and shutting down the govt over the debt limit bullshit.

Barry's Got The Power and the popularity, Repugs got shit.

[coyotes_geek]

:cheer :cheer

two bits, four bits, six bits, a dollar
everyone for blue team stand up and holler!!!!

:cheer :cheer

[TeyshaBlue]

lol

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

:lmao

[TeyshaBlue]

CG would look good in a cheerleading skirt, tbh.

[coyotes_geek]

CG would look good in a cheerleading skirt, tbh.

:wow

Did you guys hear about Obama's approval rate? It's really awesome.

[boutons_deux]

"Did you guys hear about Obama's approval rate? It's really awesome"

Barry's gonna make Boner eat shit.

[TeyshaBlue]

:wow

Did you guys hear about Obama's approval rate? It's really awesome.

You go, girl!

http://www.ngngsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/male-cheerleader.bmp

[TeyshaBlue]

boutons and a pal in a rare, casual moment.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mebzwrYWTr1qzfmlfo1_500.jpg

[coyotes_geek]

"Did you guys hear about Obama's approval rate? It's really awesome"

Barry's gonna make Boner eat shit.




Ok.


You go, girl!

http://www.ngngsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/male-cheerleader.bmp

:lol :ihit

TB _FY

http://www.infinitydish.com/tvblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Wheel-of-Fortune-2.jpg

"Would you like to solve the puzzle?"

[TeyshaBlue]

lolololol

careful, or nbadan will call this a circlejerk.

[MannyIsGod]

Bring on the "cliff".

[Drachen]

lolololol

careful, or nbadan will call this a circlejerk.

Hell NBADan called out B_D for getting too much spunk on him from the blue team circle jerk.

I called it the most damning post that I have ever seen on spurstalk.

I think the only post that could overshadow it would be this.


Cosmored, you and your conspiracy theories are going waaaaaaaaay over the edge. I think you are certifiably crazy

[TeyshaBlue]

Hell NBADan called out B_D for getting too much spunk on him from the blue team circle jerk.

I called it the most damning post that I have ever seen on spurstalk.

I think the only post that could overshadow it would be this.

lol in nbadanland, two or more people who disagree with him constitute a circle jerk. Kinda telling, really.

[Th'Pusher]

Ask the average person — even in Washington — who serves as President Obama's chief of staff and you'll probably get a blank stare.


Jack Lew hasn't been heard or seen in the "fiscal cliff" drama unfolding between the White House and Congress. But the former budget director, who took over the top White House job last January, has become a key player behind the scenes.


If Obama has one person to thank for being in the catbird seat on the fiscal cliff talks, it's Lew, who could be Obama's pick to be the next Treasury secretary. Lew finessed the August 2011 deal that set up the automatic, across-the-board tax hikes and spending cuts that both sides are now scrambling to avoid — especially the Republicans.


"The way they wrote the cliff a year and a half ago was strategically a victory for Obama, and that's just a fact," says former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. "They wrote it in a way that he ends up having all the advantages in the fight right now."


Those 2011 negotiations over the debt ceiling turned out badly for the president. He got no "grand bargain," the nation nearly defaulted on its debts and the president himself was widely perceived to have caved in to Republican demands.


But the deal that came out of it was designed to put Obama in a better negotiating position if he won re-election. Now that he has, he's enjoying the benefits, says Jared Bernstein, the former top economic aide to Vice President Biden.


"The White House was very forward-looking and strategic in the way they shaped the sequester," Bernstein says. "This is a very tough situation for Republicans, in no small part because of the skill of the negotiators from the Democrats' side."


For instance, in making sure that programs like Medicare, Pell grants or food stamps are not on the chopping block when the automatic spending cuts hit. Instead, it's defense spending and the Bush-era tax cuts that are at risk — things that are Republican priorities.


Bernstein says Lew gets a lot of the credit for that.


"Jack Lew's fingerprints are all over the parts of this sequester that protect vulnerable people, whether it's exempting the entitlements or many of the things that help low-income families," he says. "One of the things Jack always deeply understood was just how important that role of government is for people who are retirees, for people who are poor, for people who aren't connected to the economy and the market in the way that a lot of Republicans envision everybody is, but they're really not."


Lew has had years of experience toiling in the fiscal trenches.


Gingrich — who as speaker negotiated the historic balanced budget agreement with President Bill Clinton in the 1990s — says Lew's experience gave Democrats an edge.


"On their side, they have somebody who's playing chess, and on our side we are wavering between tic-tac-toe and checkers," Gingrich says. "He knows so much and he's been through this so often, he can think about three and four permutations down the road."


Before he was White House chief of staff, Lew was Obama's budget director — a job he'd also held in the Clinton White House. After serving in the Clinton administration, Lew followed the well-worn path from White House to Wall Street.


But his experience as an investment banker didn't help him with Republicans when he returned to Washington to work for Obama. During the debt ceiling negotiations, House Republican leaders said they found Lew impossible to work with, rigid and arrogant.


Bernstein says there was discord, but he interprets it differently.


"There was a time during these negotiations where Reps. [John] Boehner and [Eric] Cantor said to the president, 'We don't want to negotiate with Jack Lew anymore. We want to negotiate with [Treasury Secretary] Tim Geithner.' Now, you know, Tim Geithner is a guy I like and respect also, but to me that just kind of elevates Jack Lew's negotiating skills because he was being a little too tough on his opposition there for their liking," Bernstein says.


Because the fiscal cliff negotiations are at a sensitive stage and because Lew may be nominated to be the next Treasury secretary, the White House decided not to make him available for an interview. But it's clear he retains the same strong support from the president as he did when Obama named him chief of staff a year ago.


"Jack's economic advice has been invaluable and he has my complete trust, both because of his mastery of the numbers but because of the values behind those numbers," Obama said at the time.


In Lew's tidy White House office, there are mementos from 30 years of bipartisan negotiations — including the balanced budget deal between Clinton and Gingrich and the Social Security deal of the 1980s between Lew's old boss, House Speaker Tip O'Neill, and President Ronald Reagan. That was the deal that eventually raises the Social Security retirement age to 67.


Lew is clearly proud of those deals, but he'd be even prouder if he manages to move the current negotiations to a deal worth celebrating.




http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/12/18/167487285/low-profile-power-player-jack-lew-may-be-in-line-for-treasury-post

[exstatic]

Watching the republicans come to terms with the fact that they have zero leverage in this negotiation is pure schadenfreude considering what petulant obstructionist bitches they've been as a collective for the last 4 years.

[exstatic]

GOP Lacks Leverage, but It's Still Got Spin. (http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/110848/gop-may-lack-leverage-its-sure-got-spin)

That worked real well this election cycle. :lol

[SA210]

Obama agrees to cut Social Security in fiscal cliff deal

Negotiations to avert falling off the ‘fiscal cliff’ before the end of the year have compelled President Obama to agree to cuts in Social Security (http://www.boston.com/business/news/2012/12/17/sources-new-obama-offer-moves-toward-boehner/I7xd4gueQlok0Blve956pN/story.html) payments.......

Democrats should be disappointed in President Obama’s willingness to abandon his promises to protect Social Security. Congressional and Senate candidates will surely face devastating losses in the next election if they go along with a deal that takes money out of seniors’ pockets every month, while simultaneously raising their taxes.

Obama might think that raising taxes on the rich is the Holy Grail of fiscal cliff negotiations. But there are some 40 million Americans who would likely disagree.

The average Social Security payment (http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/13/%7E/average-monthly-social-security-benefit-for-a-retired-worker) is about $1,230 a month. If Obama signs a deal that includes using a chained CPI to reduce payments over time, for seniors struggling to make ends meet, life is about to get harder.


http://www.allvoices.com/contributed...cal-cliff-deal (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13632053-obama-agrees-to-cut-social-security-in-fiscal-cliff-deal)

Hope/Change

:wakeup

[SA210]

Obama agrees to cut Social Security in fiscal cliff deal

Negotiations to avert falling off the ‘fiscal cliff’ before the end of the year have compelled President Obama to agree to cuts in Social Security (http://www.boston.com/business/news/2012/12/17/sources-new-obama-offer-moves-toward-boehner/I7xd4gueQlok0Blve956pN/story.html) payments.......

Democrats should be disappointed in President Obama’s willingness to abandon his promises to protect Social Security. Congressional and Senate candidates will surely face devastating losses in the next election if they go along with a deal that takes money out of seniors’ pockets every month, while simultaneously raising their taxes.

Obama might think that raising taxes on the rich is the Holy Grail of fiscal cliff negotiations. But there are some 40 million Americans who would likely disagree.

The average Social Security payment (http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/13/%7E/average-monthly-social-security-benefit-for-a-retired-worker) is about $1,230 a month. If Obama signs a deal that includes using a chained CPI to reduce payments over time, for seniors struggling to make ends meet, life is about to get harder.


http://www.allvoices.com/contributed...cal-cliff-deal (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/13632053-obama-agrees-to-cut-social-security-in-fiscal-cliff-deal)

Hope/Change

:wakeup

http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/18/progressives-push-back-on-obamas-fiscal-cliff-offer/

The White House had previously suggested cuts to Social Security were off the table in fiscal cliff talks.

================================================== =======================

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama, with his latest fiscal cliff offer, proposes extending the Bush tax cuts for everyone earning less than $400,000 a year, and paying for it by increasing taxes on the middle class and cutting Social Security and Medicare.

Obama's offer would allow the payroll tax holiday to expire, meaning middle class workers will see smaller paychecks in 2013. Economists have warned that the recovery is too fragile to risk a broad tax hike on workers. It would also gradually reduce Social Security, pension and disability benefits seniors are due to receive, taking a small bite up front, but building up to much larger cuts over time.

[exstatic]

Don;'t get your posts, 210. Doesn't Red team preach that we need to cut entitlement programs? There is no bigger one than SSN.

[Drachen]

Don;'t get your posts, 210. Doesn't Red team preach that we need to cut entitlement programs? There is no bigger one than SSN.

He isn't a red teamer, he is an army of one.

[SA210]

Don;'t get your posts, 210. Doesn't Red team preach that we need to cut entitlement programs? There is no bigger one than SSN.

Who's on red team?

[SA210]

He isn't a red teamer, he is an army of one.

I keep it real

[Th'Pusher]

I keep it real
You're all over the map tbh.

[SA210]

You're all over the map tbh.

I'm anti-bullshit and ant-corruption. Both red/blue are corrupt, minus the few exceptions like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. I'm against all this murder and war, they are both responsible as well as their voters. I don't choose to be blind just because Obama is on Blue team (although he is really on red team)

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Jill Stein isn't corrupt.

[SA210]

Jill Stein isn't corrupt.

I like Jill Stein, but they don't give her a chance, neither do voters

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I voted for her.

[SA210]

I voted for her.

Well if you voted for her then my hat is off to you on that, honestly.

[Th'Pusher]

I'm anti-bullshit and ant-corruption. Both red/blue are corrupt, minus the few exceptions like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich. I'm against all this murder and war, they are both responsible as well as their voters. I don't choose to be blind just because Obama is on Blue team (although he is really on red team)
Congress is no place for ideologues.

[Wild Cobra]

So who is driving the SS CPI cuts? I searched several links, and they elude to saying it's the GOP, but since they don't outright say it, I assume it's the democrats...

Changing the CPI is not right. It is already lagging behind real inflation of the basic necessities like food, housing, and energy. If anything, the CPI needs to be re-indexed to include these real costs more accurately.

The budget cuts in entitlements need to be on the social programs supporting able bodied workers. Not SS and medicare.

[boutons_deux]

Many economists say the alternative version of the Consumer Price Index, known as the "chained CPI," is a more accurate measure of inflation. Chained CPI accounts for the way consumers avoid higher prices by substituting purchases. The Bureau of Labor Statistics has a favorite example (http://www.bls.gov/cpi/cpisupqa.htm): "If the price of pork increases while the price of beef does not, consumers might shift away from pork to beef."

The cut is small at first. After the first three years of a chained CPI regime, the average retiree on Social Security would receive $258 less in cumulative benefits, according to calculations by Social Security Works, a Washington-based advocacy group that opposes reducing benefits.
But the cumulative reduction for long-term beneficiaries would be more significant. If the chained CPI had been in place all along, today an 88-year-old who'd started drawing benefits at age 62 would receive 7.32 percent less in benefits this year, according to the group.
For Carrie Pete, a retiree in Silver Spring, Md., that would mean something like $1,080 less in annual benefits, and a cumulative reduction of roughly $15,000. The lower benefit would increase the burden on her kids to help pay for her living situation.
At 88, there are some things Pete can't do for herself anymore.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/18/chained-cpi-social-security_n_2324907.html

Many $Ts for the 1%, cut their taxes to silly low levels, then go fuck the 99%, esp the old, sick, disabled, young, poor.

[boutons_deux]

The Tax Policy Center calculated the income tax increases that would be caused by a switch to chained CPI. They’re not big — a little more than $100 a year for most families — but they’re oddly regressive [...]
The group getting the biggest tax hike is families making between $30,000 and $40,000 a year. Their increase is almost six times that faced by millionaires. That’s because millionaires are already in the top bracket, so they’re not being pushed into higher marginal rates because of changing bracket thresholds [...]
All told, chained CPI raises average taxes by about 0.19 percent of income. So, taken all together, it’s basically a big (5 percent over 12 years; more, if you take a longer view) across-the-board cut in Social Security benefits paired with a 0.19 percent income surtax.

But Republicans don’t want that small tax increase, so they’re trying to block the use of chained CPI for tax brackets. They want it only to apply to benefits.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/12/18/more-on-chained-cpi-the-benefit-cut-for-social-security-on-the-table-in-fiscal-slope-discussions/

[Wild Cobra]

Why does anyone think that changing the CPI on SS will reduce the deficit?

[boutons_deux]

Why does anyone think that changing the CPI on SS will reduce the deficit?

Repugs and conservative economists don't do facts and science, they do sadistic sociopathy.

[boutons_deux]

The CPI, or cost of living index, is used to make sure benefits keep pace with inflation, but there are lots of different ways to calculate it. The current measure, called the CPI-W, is generally accepted to overestimate inflation, but the liberals say the proposed alternative, the chained CPI, is too stingy (http://www.salon.com/2012/11/29/liberals_double_down_no_entitlement_cuts/). The chained CPI assumes seniors will adjust their buying habits in response to price shifts (e.g., if the price of oranges goes up, they’ll buy more apples), so they should be able to afford to take a haircut on benefit checks. But liberals say that seniors often barely make ends meet with current benefit levels, so cutting them more would be devastating.

The chained CPI would cut about $6,000 worth of benefits in the first 15 years of retirement for the average 65-year-old, and $16,000 over 25 years. “This change would be devastating to beneficiaries, especially widowed women, more than a third of whom rely on the program for 90 percent of their income and use every single dollar of the Social Security checks they’ve earned,” Ellison added.

http://www.alternet.org/economy/obamas-offer-fiscal-talks-insanity

[Th'Pusher]

Boehner has lost control of his caucus. Can't pull together the votes for plan B. over the cliff we go...

[boutons_deux]

Barry should back off his $400K and go back to $250K

He should also pull back his chained-CPI and raise the SS cap to $250K

[boutons_deux]

the bogus fiscal cliff is a bullshit bill created by Congress, so Congress can uncreate it

Let's Kill the "Fiscal Cliff" Instead of the Economy

So why don’t the Democrats and Republicans stop trying to do a deal that will inflict austerity?

Why not simply repeal the Budget Act of August 2011? That would kill the fiscal cliff.

Repeal would kill austerity,

prevent the recession,

save the safety net,

increase growth,

and shrink the deficit.

All versions of the Grand Betrayal (Republican and Democratic) inflict austerity, are likely to cause a recession, begin to unravel the safety net, destroy growth, and increase the deficit.


http://www.alternet.org/economy/lets-kill-fiscal-cliff-instead-economy?akid=9853.187590.QpLWHV&rd=1&src=newsletter766640&t=4

"unravel the safety net" is a long-term strategy objective of the 1%. Cut the 1% taxes to nothing and fuck the 99% into poverty, joblessness, and powerlessness.

[Wild Cobra]

The CPI, or cost of living index, is used to make sure benefits keep pace with inflation, but there are lots of different ways to calculate it. The current measure, called the CPI-W, is generally accepted to overestimate inflation, but the liberals say the proposed alternative, the chained CPI, is too stingy (http://www.salon.com/2012/11/29/liberals_double_down_no_entitlement_cuts/). The chained CPI assumes seniors will adjust their buying habits in response to price shifts (e.g., if the price of oranges goes up, they’ll buy more apples), so they should be able to afford to take a haircut on benefit checks. But liberals say that seniors often barely make ends meet with current benefit levels, so cutting them more would be devastating.

The chained CPI would cut about $6,000 worth of benefits in the first 15 years of retirement for the average 65-year-old, and $16,000 over 25 years. “This change would be devastating to beneficiaries, especially widowed women, more than a third of whom rely on the program for 90 percent of their income and use every single dollar of the Social Security checks they’ve earned,” Ellison added.

http://www.alternet.org/economy/obamas-offer-fiscal-talks-insanity
You entirely miss the point. We could cut SS programs completely, and it would have zero effect on the deficit or debt.

[boutons_deux]

You entirely miss the point. We could cut SS programs completely, and it would have zero effect on the deficit or debt.

You entirely miss the point that I KNOW SS is self-funded and separate from the general fund.

The only reason SS is related because it has used, until 2010, surplus to buy $Ts in govt bonds. When SS cashes in those bonds, the govt will have to sell bonds elsewhere.

[spursncowboys]

With a deficit of 47 billion just this year, SS is NOT self-funded

[boutons_deux]

With a deficit of 47 billion just this year, SS is NOT self-funded

All the SS has to do is cash in its bonds it bought the SS SURPLUSes.

If the SS revenues stay low due to the salary depression of the Banksters Great Depression, then raise the cap on SS contributions from $105K to $500K

[boutons_deux]

Fiscal Cliff? Let’s Call Their Bluff


The “fiscal cliff” has all the earmarks of a false flag operation, full of sound and fury, intended to extort concessions from opponents. Neil Irwin of the Washington Post calls it “a self-induced austerity crisis.” David Weidner in the Wall Street Journal calls it simply theater, designed to pressure politicians into a budget deal:


The cliff is really just a trumped-up annual budget discussion. . . . The most likely outcome is a combination of tax increases, spending cuts and kicking the can down the road.


Yet the media coverage has been “panic-inducing, falling somewhere between that given to an approaching hurricane and an alien invasion.” In the summer of 2011, this sort of media hype succeeded in causing the Dow Jones Industrial Average to plunge nearly 2000 points. But this time the market is generally ignoring the cliff, either confident a deal will be reached or not caring.


The goal of the exercise seems to be to dismantle Social Security and Medicare, something a radical group of conservatives has worked for decades to achieve. But with the recent Democratic victories, demands for “fiscal responsibility” may just result in higher taxes for the rich, without gutting the entitlements.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/fiscal_cliff_lets_call_their_bluff_20121220/

[boutons_deux]

FOCUS: Call Their Bluff and Go Over the Cliff


It’s a long-established principle of game theory (see Thomas Schelling’s classic 1956 essay in the American Economic Review (http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1805498?uid=3739560&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21101473901673)) that a fanatic who restricts his freedom to avert a disaster puts maximum pressure on his opponent to give ground.

House Speaker John Boehner’s failure to persuade rank-and-file House Republicans to raise taxes even on millionaires fits the fanatic’s strategy exactly. Boehner can now credibly claim he has no choice in the matter -Republican fanatics in the House have tied his hands and manacled his feet — so the only way to avoid going over the cliff is for Obama and the Democrats to make more concessions.

The White House’s hope of getting the Senate to pass legislation that raises taxes on the wealthy in order to pressure Boehner won’t work because the legislation can’t possibly get through the House. That’s the point: Boehner has demonstrated he has no choice; the fanatics are in charge there.

The real problem with this gambit is it doesn’t change the game. Even down the road, Boehner’s hands will still be tied and the fanatics will remain in charge — which will give Republicans the stronger position in negotiations leading to a “grand bargain.” Compromise would have to be almost entirely on the Democrats’ side.

That’s why I’d recommend going over the cliff and forcing the Republicans’ hand. It’s a risky strategy but it would at least expose the Republican tactic and put public pressure squarely on rank-and-file Republicans, where it belongs.

The fanatics in the GOP have to be held accountable or they’ll continue to hold the nation hostage to their extremism. Even if it takes until the 2014 midterms to loosen their hold, the cost is worth it.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/15233-focus-call-their-bluff-and-go-over-the-cliff (http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/15233-focus-call-their-bluff-and-go-over-the-cliff)

[Winehole23]

I keep it real
He who knows, does not say; he who says, does not know

[Winehole23]

plus, you are all over the place. you can hardly keep your shit straight because you're a fucking copycat, though, as I've said before, I'd hate to see what you'd say if you started thinking for yourself.

[boutons_deux]

Al Qaeda Disbands; Says Job of Destroying U.S. Economy Now in Congress’ Hands

The international terror group known as Al Qaeda announced its dissolution today, saying that “our mission of destroying the American economy is now in the capable hands of the U.S. Congress.”

In an official statement published on the group’s website, the current leader of Al Qaeda said that Congress’s conduct during the so-called “fiscal-cliff” showdown convinced the terrorists that they had been outdone.

“We’ve been working overtime trying to come up with ways to terrorize the American people and wreck their economy,” said the statement from Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. “But even we couldn’t come up with something like this.”

Mr. al-Zawhiri said that the idea of holding the entire nation hostage with a clock ticking down to the end of the year “is completely insane and worthy of a Bond villain.”

“As terrorists, every now and then you have to step back and admire when someone else has beaten you at your own game,” he said. “This is one of those times.”

The Al Qaeda leader was fulsome in his praise for congressional leaders, saying, “We have made many scary videos in our time but none of them were as terrifying as Mitch McConnell.”

As for the future of Al Qaeda, the statement said that it would no longer be a terror network but would become “more of a social network,” offering reviews of new music, movies and video games.

In its first movie review, Al Qaeda gave the film “Zero Dark Thirty” two thumbs down.


http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2012/12/al-qaeda-disbands-says-job-of-destroying-us-economy-now-in-congress-hands.html#ixzz2GNOcVmsA

[Th'Pusher]

Obama to appear on MTP in an attempt Bully pulpit these intransigent mother fuckers into submission.

[Wild Cobra]

Al Qaeda Disbands; Says Job of Destroying U.S. Economy Now in Congress’ Hands

Wow...

Al Qaeda finally got smart, and realized they don't have to expend resources to destroy us. We have been doing it to ourselves...

[boutons_deux]

"I’m not going to raise the debt ceiling unless we get serious about keeping the country from becoming Greece, saving Social Security and Medicare [sic]. So here’s what i would like: meaningful entitlement reform — not to turn Social Security into private accounts, not to take a voucher approach to Medicare — but, adjust the age for Social Security, CPI changes and means testing and look beyond the ten-year window. I cannot in good conscience raise the debt ceiling without addressing the long term debt problems of this country and I will not."

-- quote from that old lesbian Lindsay Graham, Confederate SC Senator

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/12/30/1379681/lindsay-graham-i-will-destroy-americas-solvency-unless-the-social-security-retirement-age-is-raised/

[boutons_deux]

"from becoming Greece"

simply impossible, but total ignorance to propagandize the rebel bubbas is how the Confederacy rolls.

and of course SS has NOTHING to do with the budget and deficit.

[boutons_deux]

Repugs now INSISTING on SS CPI.


Senate Outraged at Having to Work Weekend to Save Nation

Howls of protest filled the halls of the U.S. Senate today as dozens of Senators expressed their outrage at having to work through the weekend to save the United States from financial Armageddon.

“We’re hearing a lot about the country plunging back into recession and millions of people being thrown out of work,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky). “What we’re not hearing much about is how our Sunday is being completely and irrevocably ruined.”

Senator McConnell said that when President Obama called the Senate back to work on a budget deal this weekend, “At first I thought he was kidding. Not only have I never worked on a weekend, I’ve never met anyone who’s done such a damn fool thing.”

The Senate Minority Leader added that “if saving this country means working Saturday and Sunday, then I’m not sure this is a country worth saving.”

“Yes, I know that the fiscal cliff is a ticking time bomb that could destroy the U.S. economy for years to come and take the rest of the world with it,” he said. “I also know that Sunday is Week seventeen of the N.F.L. season and now I’m missing all my games.”

Mr. McConnell said that while “saving the nation may be important to be some people,” he worries that forcing the Senate to work on a weekend is setting a dangerous precedent.

“For years, people have run for Congress because they knew that serving here was synonymous with not working,” he said. “If that’s going to change all of a sudden, a lot of us are going to feel very betrayed.”

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2012/12/senate-outraged-at-having-to-work-weekend-to-save-nation.html?mbid=nl_Borowitz%20%2863%29

[boutons_deux]

Fiscal Cliff Debate: Why The (Very) Few Rule The Many In Congress

if no one filibusters and the Senate approves the compromise package, the House will have enough votes to approve it and send it on for the president's signature. But having enough votes is not enough. In fact, it is likely the package will not even be brought to the floor for debate and a vote.

How can this be?

Even if a majority of the whole House (Republicans and Democrats) were prepared to swallow the Senate deal, they won't get a chance unless Speaker John Boehner brings it to the floor. And Boehner probably won't. He has adopted a rule that no measure will be voted on unless it is supported by a majority of the majority party — that is, his party, the Republicans. At this point, the Senate deal looks unlikely to appeal to most House Republicans.

Many House Republicans refused to vote for higher taxes even on income over $1 million when Boehner gave them the chance back on Dec. 20. Now, any package emerging from the Senate will start the higher taxes on an income amount much closer to the president's preferred $250,000 threshold.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/12/30/168309508/fiscal-cliff-debate-why-the-very-few-rule-the-many-in-congress?sc=17&f=1001 (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/12/30/168309508/fiscal-cliff-debate-why-the-very-few-rule-the-many-in-congress?sc=17&f=1001)

It would be wonderful if the billionaire$ who finance/operate the tea baggers had their taxes go up 40% because their tea bagger puppets obstructed a deal.

[boutons_deux]

Howard Schultz, the C.E.O. of Starbucks, has a reputation as a good guy, a man who supports worthy causes. And he presumably thought he would add to that reputation when he posted an open letter urging his employees to promote fiscal bipartisanship by writing "Come together" on coffee cups.

Look, it's true that elected politicians have been unable to "come together and compromise." But saying that in generic form, and implying a symmetry between Republicans and Democrats, isn't just misleading, it's actively harmful.

The reality is that President Obama has made huge concessions. He has already cut spending sharply, and has now offered additional big spending cuts, including a cut in Social Security benefits, while signaling his willingness to retain many of the Bush tax cuts, even for people with very high incomes. Taken as a whole, the president's proposals are arguably to the right of those made by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, the co-chairmen of his deficit commission, in 2010.

In return, the Republicans have offered essentially nothing. Oh, they say they're willing to increase revenue by closing loopholes - but they've refused to specify a single loophole they're willing to close. So if there's a breakdown in negotiations, the blame rests entirely with one side of the political divide.

I'm willing to believe that Mr. Schultz doesn't know what he's doing. The same can't be said, however, about Fix the Debt.

You might not know it reading some credulous reporting, but Fix the Debt isn't some kind of new gathering of concerned citizens. On the contrary, it's just the latest addition to a group of deficit-scold shops supported by billionaire Peter Peterson, a group ranging from think tanks like the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget to the newspaper The Fiscal Times. The main difference seems to be that this gathering of the usual suspects is backed by an impressive amount of corporate cash.

Like all the Peterson-funded groups, Fix the Debt seems much more concerned with cutting Social Security and Medicare than with fighting deficits in general - and also not nearly as nonpartisan as it pretends to be. In its list of "core principles," it actually calls for lower tax rates - a very peculiar position for people supposedly horrified by the budget deficit. True, the group calls for revenue increases via unspecified base broadening, that is, closing loopholes. But that's unrealistic. And it's also, as you may have noticed, the Republican position.

What's happening now is that all the Peterson-funded groups are trying to exploit the fiscal cliff to push a benefit-cutting agenda that has nothing to do with the current crisis, using artfully deceptive language - as in that MacGuineas letter - to hide the bait and switch.

Mr. Schultz apparently fell for the con. But the rest of us shouldn't.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/opinion/krugman-brewing-up-confusion.xml;jsessionid=FAE0EA7B3205A42BD0954F043 C6D8188?f=28

[Wild Cobra]

Fuck Starbux.

Shazbot...

They are an example of everything you hate.

[boutons_deux]

I heard Shultz on NPR a few months ago. He sounded spaced out, drugged, or at very best reading weirdly from a script.

But he's super-wealthy, so Americans adore him and his financial success from horribly overpriced coffee and shit.

[SA210]

plus, you are all over the place. you can hardly keep your shit straight because you're a fucking copycat, though, as I've said before, I'd hate to see what you'd say if you started thinking for yourself.

I do think for myself, that's what bothers you is that I can say when either a Democrat or a Republican is wrong, I don't hide behind party lines like most other hypocrites. I'm not all over the place, what you mean is that in YOUR own way of discombobulated thinking that I should stick to a certain side (red/blue/libertarian, etc), rather than just right or wrong. F that. It is clear to me that anyone with THOSE views are the ones that can't think for themselves. lol all over the place. The truth is in many places moron, not just in red or blue corner. Try it out sometime, it's very liberating.

[boutons_deux]

Boner won't bring the fucking deal to a House vote

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/31/politics/fiscal-cliff/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

so over the bogus cliff it is, and NOTHING happens.

btw, over the foreclosure cliff is much more dangerous as probably 1M of 2M to lose federal unemployment insurance, probably ALL 2M are week to week, are probably behind on the mortgage already, or will be in foreclosure quite soon.

[Wild Cobra]

Boner won't bring the fucking deal to a House vote

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/31/politics/fiscal-cliff/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

so over the bogus cliff it is, and NOTHING happens.

btw, over the foreclosure cliff is much more dangerous as probably 1M of 2M to lose federal unemployment insurance, probably ALL 2M are week to week, are probably behind on the mortgage already, or will be in foreclosure quite soon.
LOL...

Why read anything past the first sentence:

Senate leaders and the White House struck a last-minute deal
Considering the senate leaders are democrats, what deals are to be struck with the republicans? Shame on the media, for making the demonrats look like the good guys.

I'm OK with this. How about the rest of you:

At the Pentagon, a Defense Department official said as many as 800,000 civilian employees could be forced to take unpaid days off

[boutons_deux]

LOL...

Why read anything past the first sentence:

Considering the senate leaders are democrats, what deals are to be struck with the republicans? Shame on the media, for making the demonrats look like the good guys.

I'm OK with this. How about the rest of you:

:lol

The WH and Senate AREN'T BONER's Repug-majority House.

My bet is that slimebag Boner still won't bring the vote to the House floor today 1 Jan because he won't have a majority of a majority (which is another key Repug TURD concept constipating any MOVEMENT in DC).

[Winehole23]

I do think for myself, that's what bothers you is that I can say when either a Democrat or a Republican is wrong, I don't hide behind party lines like most other hypocrites. I'm not all over the place, what you mean is that in YOUR own way of discombobulated thinking that I should stick to a certain side (red/blue/libertarian, etc), rather than just right or wrong. F that. It is clear to me that anyone with THOSE views are the ones that can't think for themselves. lol all over the place. The truth is in many places moron, not just in red or blue corner. Try it out sometime, it's very liberating.pretzel logic. you've got it down.

[boutons_deux]

...

[boutons_deux]

:lol

The WH and Senate AREN'T BONER's Repug-majority House.

My bet is that slimebag Boner still won't bring the vote to the House floor today 1 Jan because he won't have a majority of a majority (which is another key Repug TURD concept constipating any MOVEMENT in DC).

Boner didn't have a majority of a majority but allowed the vote anyway, first time that's been done since the m of m was started.

Twice as many Repugs voted against the deal as for it.

[boutons_deux]

Chuck Schumer was on Maddow last night saying the Dems should propose a new limit for the debt, negotiate nothing, make no spending cuts, and let the Repugs vote it down.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Chuck Schumer was on Maddow last night saying the Dems should propose a new limit for the debt, negotiate nothing, make no spending cuts, and let the Repugs vote it down.

That wouldn't be horribly counter productive at all.

[boutons_deux]

That wouldn't be horribly counter productive at all.

The House Repugs have death wish. Nearly all of them are in safely gerrymanderded seats where they fear being primaried from their right rather than from the Dems.