Fiscal Cliff Thread

**oladub** · November-08-12, 01:29 PM

We didn't hear much about the January 1 "fiscal cliff", "a massive fiscal cliff of large spending cuts and tax increases" on January 1, 2013", from either of the presidential candidates during the campaign.

Congress and the president have had a year to work on this problem. We are down to the last seven weeks before the deadline. Republicans did not want to raise the debt ceiling again so Congress kicked the can down the road by raising the debt ceiling again but promising to have this all worked out by 1/1/13 or severe fiscal measures would automatically go into effect.

Instead, nothing has been accomplished toward this end and Harry Reid said on 10/7/12, “I think the debt ceiling will come after the first of the year.” “But please everyone accept this: They tried it before—they, the Republicans.” "“They tried it before – ‘We’re going to shut down the government, and we’re not going to raise the debt ceiling,’” he said. “If they want to go through that again, fine." "“If it has to be raised, we’ll raise it.”

So we have a "fiscal cliff" coming due to make the necessary changes to have allowed the previous debt ceiling increase and Reid's stated intention to raise the debt ceiling again possibly before addressing the last increase.

Wikipedia links for starters-

fiscal cliff - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_fiscal_cliff

[[related) Bowles - Simpson -
"The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform is a Presidential Commission created in 2010 by President Barack Obamato identify "…policies to improve the fiscal situation in the medium term and to achieve fiscal sustainability over the long run." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationa...ity_and_Reform

Question: What to do?

**old guy** · November-08-12, 02:32 PM

Compromise. It has to start at some point with someone. Boehner seems like he's possibly willing to start the process but McConnell doesn't seem to have a clue about what just happened. The Democratic side of the aisle is going to have to get realistic too. I think they should run Norquist out of town on a rail. I think he's run his course.

**TKshreve** · November-08-12, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by old guy

Compromise. It has to start at some point with someone. Boehner seems like he's possibly willing to start the process but McConnell doesn't seem to have a clue about what just happened. The Democratic side of the aisle is going to have to get realistic too. I think they should run Norquist out of town on a rail. I think he's run his course.

You hit it Old Guy. McConnell is a absolute waste of space sitting in his ivory tower, thinking he's untouchable. But the Dems are going to need to think about offering up some cuts. And some big ones. I would suggest to them that they review where the most waste and fraud exists and figure out a way to create jobs by cutting waste and costs. Win/win/win. Entitlements will need to be on the table as well. Start with the areas that are easily subjected to fraud and abuse.

And Grover should be strung up for the unpatriotic charlatan he is.

**old guy** · November-08-12, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by TKshreve

I would suggest to them that they review where the most waste and fraud exists and figure out a way to create jobs by cutting waste and costs. Win/win/win. Entitlements will need to be on the table as well. Start with the areas that are easily subjected to fraud and abuse.

I agree. Dealing with waste and fraud should be something that can be dealt with in a bipartisan fashion, easily. I'm tired of people saying that you need bigger solutions to solve the big problems.
But we need to start attacking all these problems and eventually the tally on what is being saved will begin to show. There are so many simple things where we should be looking. If it's true that it costs 2.4 cents to manufacture a penny, where's the logic? I've also read that it costs over 11 cents to produce a nickel. That sounds high, but if it's true, why don't we eliminate them or make them with cheaper materials? No wars for a while might help too. But attacking medicare fraud I think is essential.

**TKshreve** · November-08-12, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by old guy

I agree. Dealing with waste and fraud should be something that can be dealt with in a bipartisan fashion, easily. I'm tired of people saying that you need bigger solutions to solve the big problems.
But we need to start attacking all these problems and eventually the tally on what is being saved will begin to show. There are so many simple things where we should be looking. If it's true that it costs 2.4 cents to manufacture a penny, where's the logic? I've also read that it costs over 11 cents to produce a nickel. That sounds high, but if it's true, why don't we eliminate them or make them with cheaper materials? No wars for a while might help too. But attacking medicare fraud I think is essential.

I am a big believer in our safety net, so don't mix up what I'm saying. We are only as strong as how well we take care of our sick, poor and elderly. But when people slip onto the teat and refuse to "try" it creates a slippery slope.

**oladub** · November-09-12, 12:11 AM

There doesn't seem to be much flexibility from either side. Harry Ried says he intends to raise the debt ceiling to over $18T. Boehner and McConnell are opposed to raising any taxes although they are agreeable to raising some unspecified other government revenue [[cut tax loopholes and breaks?). Paul Krugman just wrote, "Mr. Obama should hang tough, declaring himself willing, if necessary, to hold his ground even at the cost of letting his opponents inflict damage on a still-shaky economy. And this is definitely no time to negotiate a “grand bargain”.

Meanwhile the CBO says that if the fiscal cliff goes into effect, unemployment will go back to 9.2%.

**firstandten** · November-09-12, 12:30 AM

We most likely will have a mexican standoff

JVB · November-09-12, 11:32 AM

Does everybody realize that at some point we have to stop spending money we don't have?

**poobert** · November-09-12, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by JVB

Does everybody realize that at some point we have to stop spending money we don't have?

It's high time we stop refusing to collect a fair share of taxes from the people and things which need it least.

JVB · November-09-12, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by poobert

It's high time we stop refusing to collect a fair share of taxes from the people and things which need it least.

Fine, take all the rich peoples money. We could literally raise taxes to 100% on all millionaires/billionaires - we could take very dollar they have and still owe trillions of dollars.

At some point we have to realize there is no money and the sooner we realize it and change our habits the easier it's going to be. We are literally enslaving our children and stealing their futures.

**TKshreve** · November-09-12, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by JVB

Fine, take all the rich peoples money. We could literally raise taxes to 100% on all millionaires/billionaires - we could take very dollar they have and still owe trillions of dollars.

At some point we have to realize there is no money and the sooner we realize it and change our habits the easier it's going to be. We are literally enslaving our children and stealing their futures.

That's simply not true and you're shooting from the hip. In fact it is said that the ultra wealthy have trillions stashed illegally overseas {http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederic...re-study-says/} which would go a long way towards paying back the debt. Granted, a lot of it is foreign "investment" but I would venture to guess the U.S. has a good chunk of it. Just imagine if this money was even circulating through our economy [[or trickling down if you like) let alone been taxed. Yeah, we'd be having a very different conversation right now.

Additionally, a grand "offer" was posed to the conservative congressmen last time around with $10 of spending cuts to every $1 of revenue increase. Was that not sufficient enough to get the ball rolling? What will bring the right to the bargaining table?

JVB · November-09-12, 01:32 PM

Originally Posted by TKshreve

That's simply not true and you're shooting from the hip.

It is most certainly true. The entire GDP of the United States is around $15 trillion which is over a trillion less than the national debt. That's the entire freaking gross domestic product of the entire country and everyone in it. There is no math in the world that makes this level of spending sustainable.

Originally Posted by TKshreve

In fact it is said that the ultra wealthy have trillions stashed illegally overseas {http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederic...re-study-says/} which would go a long way towards paying back the debt. Granted, a lot of it is foreign "investment" but I would venture to guess the U.S. has a good chunk of it. Just imagine if this money was even circulating through our economy [[or trickling down if you like) let alone been taxed. Yeah, we'd be having a very different conversation right now.

You seem to be confusing all of the money in the world, with all the money that rich people in the US have. Regardless, how can you justify taking everything from some people to give it to other people. Can I come to your house and take all of your stuff and give it my friends and family? Do you think everyone in the world should have equal money, property etc?

Originally Posted by TKshreve

Additionally, a grand "offer" was posed to the conservative congressmen last time around with $10 of spending cuts to every $1 of revenue increase. Was that not sufficient enough to get the ball rolling? What will bring the right to the bargaining table?

That was not an offer, it was posed as a question by a moderator at a debate. But yes, they would be stupid not to do something like that. It's irrelevant though because congress will never make those types of cuts under any administration. Republicans and Democrats have a big problem with spending other people's money.

**oladub** · November-09-12, 01:58 PM

Originally Posted by TKshreve

Additionally, a grand "offer" was posed to the conservative congressmen last time around with $10 of spending cuts to every $1 of revenue increase. Was that not sufficient enough to get the ball rolling? What will bring the right to the bargaining table?

The Bowles-Simpson Commission did come up with the following. The President and Congressional Republicans did agree to go along with the Bowles-Simpson plan. Since it has been published though we have only been hearing crickets from both sides.

From wikipedia - On November 10 NCFRR co-chairs Simpson and Bowles released a draft proposal for consideration by other commission members. The proposal presented five "steps"

$200 billion reduction per year in discretionary spending with proposed cuts including reducing defense procurement by 15% and closing one third of overseas bases, eliminating earmarks, and cutting the federal work force by 10%.
$100 billion in increased tax revenues through various tax reform proposals, such as introducing a 15 cent per gallon gasoline tax and eliminating or restricting a variety of tax deductions such as the home mortgage interest deduction and the deduction for employer-provided healthcare benefits.
Controlling health care costs by maintaining the Medicare cost controls associated with the recent health care reform legislation, in addition to considering a public option and a further increase in the authority ofIndependent Payment Advisory Board.
A reduction in entitlements, including farm subsidies, civilian and military federal pensions and student loan subsidies.
Modifications to the Social Security program to raise the payroll tax and the retirement age

**rb336** · November-09-12, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by JVB

Fine, take all the rich peoples money. We could literally raise taxes to 100% on all millionaires/billionaires - we could take very dollar they have and still owe trillions of dollars.

If you looked at the graphs that have been posted numerous times, you would see just what proportion of the deficit is due to two things - the wars and the Bush tax cuts. taking taxes back to Clinton era levels will go a long way to getting rid of that deficit. If Dubya hadn't enacted his cuts and taken us into two unfunded wars, the Clinton surpluses would have paid off the debt - all of it - in ten years, as Dubya stated in his first SOTU [[that was the last time the Republicans actually got the math right)

**Lowell** · November-09-12, 04:06 PM

It is a flat out fact that we have run up the credit card and it is time to pay it down, even pay it off. Just like any family has to do in that situation, it means paying more and spending less.

One part of me says drive it off the cliff because what it calls for is what is needed to be done. It just can't be done all at once but the bottom of that cliff is where we should end up.

Taxes should go up in a graduated manner on anyone with $50K or more [that's earnings too, not taxable income] and applied to debt reduction. All loop holes and subsidies immediately frozen then cut in graduated stages. Every program should start with a flat across the board cut. Only the helpless should be spared.

Defense in particular should be whacked. It is an almost unregulated mess. For just one example we don't need a Navy bigger than the next ten countries or maintain 13 aircraft carriers when the rest of the world had 9.

A balanced budget amendment should follow and a requirement that that any military action over $1 billion require a declaration of war by congress.

**rb336** · November-09-12, 04:47 PM

Lowell, I agree 100%. I'd like to add that Social Security shouldn't be touched as it has not added a penny to the debt. In fact, it is one of the largest holders of that debt. The absurd payments the post office is required to pay should be axed immediately as well.

**coracle** · November-09-12, 04:53 PM

We have NOTHING to show for the last $5/6 Trillion given away to Welfare; Food Stamps; Gov. Workers; Foreign Aid; Medicaid; Defense and the rest of the handouts to the non producers; [[not to mention Public Sector Unions and Obomacare). This is where cuts should start. At least 10% across the board. If we cut enough and live within our means maybe we can afford to build some infrastructure to serve ALL the people.

**rb336** · November-09-12, 05:13 PM

Ah, the wonderful Republican Math rears it's head yet again. Welfare isn't even 10% of what you say, AND Obama's 2013 budget cuts welfare by almost $30 billion with similar cuts the next two years. Military spending, not including paying down the Dubya wars and "black projects", is more than double welfare spending. Ah, but I see you include virtually all government as "Welfare." god, that might just be the dumbest thing I've read. Anywhere

Now beyond that, would you say getting life-saving medical care to children is nothing? allowing children to eat is nothing? if so, you are a giant A$$

**gazhekwe** · November-09-12, 05:22 PM

If all the government workers were laid off or fired, coracle, the unemployment rate would skyrocket, job competition in the private sector would go sky high, and you would have to do without your military support, international intelligence to protect you from Al Qaeda and other malfeasors, safe food, safe workplaces, roads, bridges, transportation, infrastructure maintenance, police, firemen, emergency workers, and on and on. Think Somalia, sound good?

JVB · November-09-12, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by rb336

If you looked at the graphs that have been posted numerous times, you would see just what proportion of the deficit is due to two things - the wars and the Bush tax cuts. taking taxes back to Clinton era levels will go a long way to getting rid of that deficit. If Dubya hadn't enacted his cuts and taken us into two unfunded wars, the Clinton surpluses would have paid off the debt - all of it - in ten years, as Dubya stated in his first SOTU [[that was the last time the Republicans actually got the math right)

Bush was an idiot - what is your point? Democrats and Republicans share the blame. How does that change the fact that we are $16 trillion in debt and climbing and at some point you have to pay the piper [[China). How long do you suggest we ignore the problem?

Originally Posted by rb336

Ah, the wonderful Republican Math rears it's head yet again. Welfare isn't even 10% of what you say

If you read the rest of his post, he included defense in there as well "Welfare; Food Stamps; Gov. Workers; Foreign Aid; Medicaid; Defense and the rest of the handouts to the non producers;".

**Goose** · November-09-12, 05:45 PM

there is NEVER any "cuts" and never will be, when liberals go nutz when programs are cut its never - we spent $10 last year so this year we are cutting a dollar and only spending $9 - NO

it works like this, we spent $10 last year, next year we plan on spending $12, a proposal was offered to cut the increase to only spend $11 next year and its passed off as a cut in spending and everyone goes apeshit....

in reality, if an across the board FREEZE in all increases in spending we put in place that would go VERY far in to solving the problem.... Spend what was spent in 2012 and spend NO more until the problem is solved...

but thats too easy....

**rb336** · November-09-12, 05:46 PM

If you read my post you would have seen this: "Ah, but I see you include virtually all government as "Welfare.""

It was even in italics

And again, Goose, Obama's budgets are cutting welfare spending by around $100 billion over the next few years.

PS - you need a remedial grammar lesson. That was so bad as to be nearly unintelligible

**coracle** · November-09-12, 06:13 PM

Like I say, we have NOTHING - that's NOTHING/ZERO/NADA. to show for $5/6 Trillion deficit spending in the last 4 years - except many more on Welfare and Food Stamps and the like. Move over Greece [[Spain, Portugal, Italy, et al) we will dwarf you all together and make you look solvent; we can find far more reasons for people to live off the State. [[read that as the "rich" because the State doesn't produce any money; they only confiscate and waste it).

**rb336** · November-09-12, 06:47 PM

We don't have the second great depression, we have 39 straight months of job growth, the highest consumer confidence index since 2007. Our situation is no where NEAR Greece or the other three. try finding out the actual facts [[and accepting them - they aren't "opinions" anymore than gravity is an opinion) for once. It might keep you from having a stroke

**Goose** · November-09-12, 07:07 PM

Energizer -

The St. Louis-based company said Thursday that it expects to shed about 1,500 employees. When finished, the restructuring should lead to $200 million in pretax yearly savings, Energizer said. It aims to have most of its restructuring steps finished by the end of September 2014.

US Cellular -

The move will result in 980 job cuts at U.S. Cellular, with 640 in the Chicago area, according to a spokeswoman. The cuts are slightly under 12 percent of the approximately 8,400 total employees U.S. Cellular had at the end of the third quarter.

Vestas Wind Systems -

Vestas Wind Systems A/S [[VWS) is seeking to sell a stake of as much as 20 percent and said it’s reducing headcount by 3,000 to raise the staff cuts by the biggest wind turbine maker to almost a third over two years.

Husqvarna -

Husqvarna AB [[HUSQB), the world’s biggest maker of powered garden tools, plans to cut about 600 jobs in a move that will save 220 million kronor [[$33 million) a year by 2014.

just in the past two days.... and the list goes on and on......