Dems want to go over the fiscal cliff

[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 . 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/obam...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 bull 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...tter766640&t=4

"unravel the safety net" is a long-term strategy objective of the 1%. Cut the 1% taxes to nothing and 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 . 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/obam...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 en lements.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/print...luff_20121220/

[boutons_deux]

FOCUS: Call Their Bluff and Go Over the Cliff


It’s a long-established principle of game theory (see Thomas Sc ing’s classic 1956 essay in the American Economic Review) 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

[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 straight because you're a ing 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/blog...#ixzz2GNOcVmsA

[Th'Pusher]

Obama to appear on MTP in an attempt Bully pulpit these intransigent mother ers 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 en lement 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/201...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/blog...itz%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

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...43C6D8188?f=28

[Wild Cobra]

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 .

[SA210]

plus, you are all over the place. you can hardly keep your straight because you're a ing 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 ing deal to a House vote

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/31/politi...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.