Fiscal Cliff

[kimmy]

Good for him....most politicians don't know when to leave.

He had help deciding when to leave. He was given a hint that was too strong to ignore.

He did....and was refreshingly honest about how America's bread gets buttered.

I agree with you, though probably not in the sense you mean it. There's no arguing that Mitt did open a lot of eyes as to how "bread gets buttered". Thanks to press scrutiny of his financial and business dealings, we all learned a lot about tax dodges and vulture capitalism.

Frankly, he really doesn't owe you anything in Canada. You have plenty of your own "asswipes" to worry about, IMHO.

And sadly for us, most of them are too sensible to bring the kind of attention to themselves that Mitt brought to himself and his ilk. That's too bad.

-k

[bush_cheney2004]

He had help deciding when to leave. He was given a hint that was too strong to ignore.

I guess he'll just have to suffer with his millions...poor Mitt.

I agree with you, though probably not in the sense you mean it. There's no arguing that Mitt did open a lot of eyes as to how "bread gets buttered". Thanks to press scrutiny of his financial and business dealings, we all learned a lot about tax dodges and vulture capitalism.

Learning the obvious means they just never paid attention in the first place.

And sadly for us, most of them are too sensible to bring the kind of attention to themselves that Mitt brought to himself and his ilk. That's too bad.

Not sure what that means, but I am pretty sure it doesn't apply across an international border. Governor Romney has nothing to apologize for.

[Shady]

Really? "Asswipe" ? The election is long over, but apparently such deep commentary continues from across the border.

Yeah. I thought that Romney Derangement Syndrome would subside somewhat after the election. Apparently not. What I don't understand is the level of hostility and vitriol that these people operate under. It really is quite astonishing.

[Shady]

Yah but it did happen Shady. I just cited the source. GET OUT OF THE BUBBLE!!!!!!!!!!

It needs to go to 70, and the cost of living increases need to be calculated differently. These changes also need to apply to Medicare and medicaid.

[Shady]

Millions, maybe, but not identical millions. I think Obama needs a few more zeroes on the end. Romney's estimated to have at least $250 million, and now that he can leave politics and get back into private equity, he might have a billion before he's done.

No, he's not an asswipe because he's rich. He'd be an asswipe even if he was a hundredaire. He'd just be a much less famous and powerful asswipe. He's said and done a lot of things that led me to that opinion; the statement I mentioned above was just one of them.

I brighten my country with my sunny disposition, my civic spirit and solid citizenship, my charitable efforts, and my contributions to a number of community projects. I've offered my services to the government on several occasions; they've declined thus far, but I will be here if required. And I'm a tax payer; something Willard hasn't always been able to say.

I just think that if a guy is going to run for office on the premise that rich-guys and corporations need lower taxes, he ought to man up and show us.

-k

You've done far less to help your country than Mitt Romney has done to help his. And yet for some reason, you continue to lie about his policies. The election is over. Your socialist hero won. You can stop the lying and spinning regarding Mr.Romney. Use logic and reason more instead of just emotion.

-s

[bleeding heart]

Yeah. I thought that Romney Derangement Syndrome would subside somewhat after the election. Apparently not.

Let's sum this up: You thought that a non-existent "syndrome," coined about somebody else altogether for altogether partisan reasons, and used incessantly ever since by people whose only rhetorical style is to crib from luminous reactionaries like Charles Krauthammer because they're too lazy to even find someone good from whom to plagiarize....and well, you're wondering why it hasn't subsided?

Because you do not wish to abandon the delusion that it's real, or that it's meaningful. That's why.

What I don't understand is the level of hostility and vitriol that these people operate under. It really is quite astonishing.

You mean our poster Kimmy? Really?

Edited December 5, 2012 by bleeding heart

[punked]

It needs to go to 70, and the cost of living increases need to be calculated differently. These changes also need to apply to Medicare and medicaid.

You just said he needs to do what Harper did. Now you change your tune because it was shown you don't know anything. Stop moving the goal posts because your side is to dumb to know what laws are on the books.

[dre]

In Mitts defense he IS a "job creator". Just recently he helped secure 4 years of employment for an African American fellow, proving his strong commitment to minority employment!

Edited December 5, 2012 by dre

[Shady]

I was referring to the recommendations of Simpson-Bowles regarding social security, etc.

[punked]

I was referring to the recommendations of Simpson-Bowles regarding social security, etc.

Sure you were Shady which is why you said that Obama needed to take the Harper approach. With out knowing that approach was passed 30 years ago by the Dems. If Simpson-Bowles was so great then more then 38 people would have voted for it Shady. Your side already tanked that one. BTW Simpson-Bowles raised rates on the upper 2% as well.

Edited December 5, 2012 by punked

[Boges]

I saw an interesting perspective on this on CNN last night. The Republicans are willing to see taxes be raised on much of the middle class because of this Fiscal Cliff in order to avoid taxes being raised on the top 2% of the population.

Quite ironic.

Edited December 6, 2012 by Boges

[Shady]

I saw an interesting perspective on this on CNN last night. The Republicans are willing to see taxes be raised on much of the middle class because of this Fiscal Cliff in order to avoid taxes being raised on the top 2% of the population.

Quite ironic.

No, they don't want taxes to go up on anyone, without getting real reform and spending cuts.

[Boges]

No, they don't want taxes to go up on anyone, without getting real reform and spending cuts.

But if they refuse to cut a deal taxes will go up. Pragmatism FTW.

[Shady]

But if they refuse to cut a deal taxes will go up. Pragmatism FTW.

Raising taxes doesn't even begin to solve the problem. It's purely symbolic.

[bush_cheney2004]

But if they refuse to cut a deal taxes will go up. Pragmatism FTW.

Both parties agreed to this possible outcome last year. All tax cuts should have expired two years ago. Rich people are Americans too.

[Boges]

Both parties agreed to this possible outcome last year. All tax cuts should have expired two years ago. Rich people are Americans too.

Didn't they agree to this in order to force them to make a deal. Sort of a mutually ensured destruction unless they act. Looks like some might prefer the destruction.

One of the parties have to blink and considering the Democrats won the Senate and the White House the Republicans should be more flexible.

[bush_cheney2004]

Didn't they agree to this in order to force them to make a deal. Sort of a mutually ensured destruction unless they act. Looks like some might prefer the destruction.

Taxes need to be raised and spending needs to be cut. If not with a scalpel, then with an axe. No more dithering.

One of the parties have to blink and considering the Democrats won the Senate and the White House the Republicans should be more flexible.

But they don't have to be, as the House can stop any deal and also threaten to not extend the debt ceiling. The Republicans also have less to lose in the short term. Obama signed off on the fiscal cliff last year.

[Topaz]

In 2007, the US unemployment was 7.4 million . now I hear its at 40 million, that's more people out of work than Canada has people! Can imagine what the EI Fund looks like over there.

[Shady]

In 2007, the US unemployment was 7.4 million . now I hear its at 40 million, that's more people out of work than Canada has people! Can imagine what the EI Fund looks like over there.

It's gigantic, because Democrats like to offer 99 week unemployment benefits. 3 times as long as we do in Canada. But under Obama's bad economic policies, you pretty much need 99 weeks to find a decent job.

[Moonlight Graham]

If the US doesn't figure this out by the deadline, should Canada and the rest of NATO invade?

[Smallc]

Probably. That's the plan, anyway.

[Sleipnir]

http://arts.nationalpost.com/2012/12/07/still-not-sure-what-the-fiscal-cliff-is-let-mr-burns-help-you-out/

A video for people wanting to understand the fiscal cliff without thinking hard.

[Argus]

Well, the market plunged today after Boehner was humiliated by his own party. He tried to outflank Obama by passing a law which would have raised taxes on those making more than a million a year. But the Tea Party wackos in his own party rebelled, making it uncertain how long he's even going to remain speaker. If he can't even get his own party to agree to a tax increase on those making more than a million then what hope of getting any compromise with the Democrats who want increases on those earning more than $250k?

It's obvious now that too many Republicans are too beholden to the millionaires and billionaires who financed their campaigns and who hold their leashes. They'll agree to tax increases on everyone else, but not on their rich paymasters.

I think now what's likely to happen is that the automatic tax increases and spending cuts will indeed kick in on January 1. Shortly after that Obama will introduce a bill cutting taxes on those earning under $250k. The Republicans will have little choice but to pass it. If they refuse it will become glaringly clear even to their most enthusiastic bible thumpers, white trash and blue rinse set supporters that they only care about the rich. Shortly after will come a bill retargeting some of the spending cuts, and probably putting more money into defense to make up for the big cuts there, combined with tax reform.

[cybercoma]

Well, the market plunged today after Boehner was humiliated by his own party. He tried to outflank Obama by passing a law which would have raised taxes on those making more than a million a year. But the Tea Party wackos in his own party rebelled, making it uncertain how long he's even going to remain speaker. If he can't even get his own party to agree to a tax increase on those making more than a million then what hope of getting any compromise with the Democrats who want increases on those earning more than $250k?

It's obvious now that too many Republicans are too beholden to the millionaires and billionaires who financed their campaigns and who hold their leashes. They'll agree to tax increases on everyone else, but not on their rich paymasters.

I think now what's likely to happen is that the automatic tax increases and spending cuts will indeed kick in on January 1. Shortly after that Obama will introduce a bill cutting taxes on those earning under $250k. The Republicans will have little choice but to pass it. If they refuse it will become glaringly clear even to their most enthusiastic bible thumpers, white trash and blue rinse set supporters that they only care about the rich. Shortly after will come a bill retargeting some of the spending cuts, and probably putting more money into defense to make up for the big cuts there, combined with tax reform.

The rednecks and Bible thumpers will blame the Muslim *racial epithet* in charge.

As Rick Santorum said, the GOP is the party of the stupid.

Edited December 21, 2012 by cybercoma

[sharkman]

This cliff was constructed by Obama and it looks like he's going to get his wish of tax hikes across the board. All the finger pointing and gamesmanship is just window dressing.