The House Speaker has no leverage on the Bush tax cuts. We should stop taking him seriously.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 11, 2012 3:25 AM GMT
    "The American political system is full of checks and balances, and the way the game works is that tie goes to the status quo. And in this case, the status quo is that the tax cuts expire. Conservatives can perhaps console themselves with the realization that the expiration isn’t an underhanded liberal trick. It’s their own trick, undertaken to make the apparent cost of the tax cuts smaller. Next time, having learned their lesson, they should just pass a smaller, but more permanent, reduction in taxes. If they’d done that, then Obama would have no power to force higher rates on the country. ...

    The conceit here is the frankly bizarre idea that since Obama wants to extend the Bush tax cuts for the middle class, he needs to engage in some kind of bargaining process. But this is silly. The Senate already passed a plan to extend the middle-class tax cuts. Now the choice before the House of Representatives is whether they want to vote to pass that plan before the new year or after the new year. "

    http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2012/11/boehner_and_the_fiscal_cliff_the_house_speaker_is_bluffing_about_the_bush.html

  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 11, 2012 3:48 AM GMT
    This is exactly what I predicted.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 11, 2012 3:51 AM GMT
    from the article:

    "Remember the famous scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark when Indiana Jones faces off against a guy who unsheathes a scimitar and wows the audience with his fancy swordsmanship--only to get shot in the chest by Indy?

    The swordsman—that’s House Speaker John Boehner right now on the Bush tax cuts. "



    Matthew Yglesias is an important voice here. He's a CONSERVATIVE

    who knows the BULLSHIT OF THE RIGHT very, very well.

    Also on Slate, Dave Weigel is a conservative who has wised up to the MISINFORMATION that is poisoning his fellow conservatives.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 11, 2012 3:59 AM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    The economy was the #1 concern in the election.

    Americans gave Obama the benefit of the doubt! The majority agrees that the economy is improving and they agree that we are not there yet in terms of the economy. Americans believe Obama because they see how much he got done DESPITE Republican obstructionism.

    Republicans have no leverage! None, whatsoever! They are not in the position to call the shots, like Boehner is still smugly doing.

    This is what's going to happen regarding the fiscal cliff: There will be no agreement and the fiscal cliff will happen. Then immediately, Obama will push a tax cuts package for the middle class that is equivalent to what he wants out of the current Bush tax cuts. The super rich will pay more. More than 80% of Americans favor raising taxes on the very wealthy based on polls conducted before the election. The Republicans will be caught again, obstructing Obama and not supporting the middle class!

    I dare the Republicans to do that again...


    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/2788472/?forumpage=1
    NOV 09, 2012
    06:26 PM EST
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 11, 2012 5:17 AM GMT
    Boehner has said he remains opposed to increases in tax rates for rich people, but he isn't opposed to getting rid of loopholes and deductions. I say Obama should call his bluff (like Clinton did to Republican bluffs in the 90s) and propose drastic cuts in loopholes and deductions for rich people in exchange for extending all the Bush tax cuts.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 11, 2012 12:40 PM GMT
    sfbayguy saidBoehner has said he remains opposed to increases in tax rates for rich people, but he isn't opposed to getting rid of loopholes and deductions. I say Obama should call his bluff (like Clinton did to Republican bluffs in the 90s) and propose drastic cuts in loopholes and deductions for rich people in exchange for extending all the Bush tax cuts.


    That's not calling Boehner's bluff. That's going along with exactly what Boehner desires in order to avoid taxes going up on those making over $250,000.

    Boehner has no leverage whatsoever. Read the article.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Nov 11, 2012 4:20 PM GMT
    coolarmydude said

    That's not calling Boehner's bluff. That's going along with exactly what Boehner desires in order to avoid taxes going up on those making over $250,000.


    But removing many of the tax loopholes available mostly to the rich is raising their taxes. It seems to me that not raising the rate, but removing the loopholes, increases the taxes the rich will be paying and effectively accomplishes what they are trying to get done. I don't think they should raise the rate AND remove the loopholes. This could be bad for the economy and have a trickle down effect on unemployment, prices, and so on. I think it's a good thing that a compromise is the only way -- neither side should get everything they want. Even removing SOME of the deductions is worrisome as to how this might effect the whole scenario. Take the "Mortgage Deduction". This is a huge thing to anyone who is a homeowner, and removing this not only would significantly raise every homeowners taxes, but it could also cause a slow down to the real estate market that is only just now finally seeing signs of life again.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 11, 2012 5:19 PM GMT
    ". This could be bad for the economy and have a trickle down effect on unemployment, prices, and so on. "

    "TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT" is a concept that Repubs still embrace.

    They say "Let the Plutocrats decide how to tax themselves".

    ...and from their ever-increasing concentration of wealth,

    The Economy will grow for all.


    IN PRACTICE, that has not worked to expand the base of opportunity for prosperity and productivity. JUST THE OPPOSITE.

    The entire point of a progressive tax system is that we give opportunity to the people who are the most driven to produce goods and services NOW.

    NOT to favor those who have already hoarded their fortunes.

    Entrepreneurs and those who are educating themselves in the new technologies are coming from THE MIDDLE CLASS to a much higher degree than they are from the currently wealthy and satisfied.

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Nov 11, 2012 5:30 PM GMT
    JockTheVote said
    "TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT" is a concept that Repubs still embrace.


    That may be so, but it cannot be entirely discounted either. Bottomline: Compromise has to be reached if there is any hope whatsoever of breaking the stalemate and reaching an agreement to the fiscal cliff mess. Neither side will get everything they want.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Nov 11, 2012 10:47 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    coolarmydude said

    That's not calling Boehner's bluff. That's going along with exactly what Boehner desires in order to avoid taxes going up on those making over $250,000.


    But removing many of the tax loopholes available mostly to the rich is raising their taxes. It seems to me that not raising the rate, but removing the loopholes, increases the taxes the rich will be paying and effectively accomplishes what they are trying to get done. I don't think they should raise the rate AND remove the loopholes. This could be bad for the economy and have a trickle down effect on unemployment, prices, and so on. I think it's a good thing that a compromise is the only way -- neither side should get everything they want. Even removing SOME of the deductions is worrisome as to how this might effect the whole scenario. Take the "Mortgage Deduction". This is a huge thing to anyone who is a homeowner, and removing this not only would significantly raise every homeowners taxes, but it could also cause a slow down to the real estate market that is only just now finally seeing signs of life again.



    RONALD REAGAN and the Democratic Congress removed almost all of the tax loophole, with the 1986 tax reform. Then, over the next 10 or so years, the Congress gradually put all of the tax loopholes back into effect.

    Closing loopholes and ending entitlements are not the answer.
    Let the Bush tax cuts expire for everybody.
    Then, pass tax cuts for everybody but the rich.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2465

    Nov 11, 2012 11:19 PM GMT
    I'm not sure what the big deal is about the "Bush Tax Cuts." Let them expire. That is of course what is about to happen. No big deal.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 11, 2012 11:32 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    coolarmydude said

    That's not calling Boehner's bluff. That's going along with exactly what Boehner desires in order to avoid taxes going up on those making over $250,000.


    But removing many of the tax loopholes available mostly to the rich is raising their taxes. It seems to me that not raising the rate, but removing the loopholes, increases the taxes the rich will be paying and effectively accomplishes what they are trying to get done. I don't think they should raise the rate AND remove the loopholes. This could be bad for the economy and have a trickle down effect on unemployment, prices, and so on. I think it's a good thing that a compromise is the only way -- neither side should get everything they want. Even removing SOME of the deductions is worrisome as to how this might effect the whole scenario. Take the "Mortgage Deduction". This is a huge thing to anyone who is a homeowner, and removing this not only would significantly raise every homeowners taxes, but it could also cause a slow down to the real estate market that is only just now finally seeing signs of life again.


    Not everyone applies or is eligible to the same loophole (deduction). But everyone would be affected by the necessary tax rate changes.


    And about this compromise, now the Republicans want to compromise? Too late. This election was about two contrasting visions and approaches to fixing our issues. The majority has spoken. The minority has no leverage.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 11, 2012 11:40 PM GMT
    When 83% of the American public want the rates raised as part of a comprehensive debt reduction package ?

    You have to be some kinda dick not to listen
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 11, 2012 11:49 PM GMT
    GQjock saidWhen 83% of the American public want the rates raised as part of a comprehensive debt reduction package ?

    You have to be some kinda dick not to listen


    And that ain't nothin' new!
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Nov 12, 2012 12:56 AM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    coolarmydude said

    That's not calling Boehner's bluff. That's going along with exactly what Boehner desires in order to avoid taxes going up on those making over $250,000.


    But removing many of the tax loopholes available mostly to the rich is raising their taxes. It seems to me that not raising the rate, but removing the loopholes, increases the taxes the rich will be paying and effectively accomplishes what they are trying to get done. I don't think they should raise the rate AND remove the loopholes. This could be bad for the economy and have a trickle down effect on unemployment, prices, and so on. I think it's a good thing that a compromise is the only way -- neither side should get everything they want. Even removing SOME of the deductions is worrisome as to how this might effect the whole scenario. Take the "Mortgage Deduction". This is a huge thing to anyone who is a homeowner, and removing this not only would significantly raise every homeowners taxes, but it could also cause a slow down to the real estate market that is only just now finally seeing signs of life again.


    Not everyone applies or is eligible to the same loophole (deduction). But everyone would be affected by the necessary tax rate changes.


    And about this compromise, now the Republicans want to compromise? Too late. This election was about two contrasting visions and approaches to fixing our issues. The majority has spoken. The minority has no leverage.



    My friend, the "minority" has a MAJORITY in the House of Representatives, and they can obstruct legislation for as long as it takes them to get what they want.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Nov 12, 2012 3:52 AM GMT
    coolarmydude said< The majority has spoken. The minority has no leverage.


    Maybe you should take a civics class icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 12, 2012 4:08 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    coolarmydude said< The majority has spoken. The minority has no leverage.

    Maybe you should take a civics class icon_wink.gif

    Maybe you should just take a hike. You taunted, ridiculed & insulted Obama supporters here, made political claims & predictions that were knowingly false, said our heads would explode, were personally offensive to others in every way.

    Now you want to start this crap all over again, pretend you didn't lose, and begin to wage the election a second time. No thanks, just STFU, OK? Game's over, you lost, go away.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Nov 12, 2012 4:54 AM GMT
    ART_DECO said
    Maybe you should just take a hike. You taunted, ridiculed & insulted Obama supporters here, made political claims & predictions that were knowingly false, said our heads would explode, were personally offensive to others in every way.

    Now you want to start this crap all over again, pretend you didn't lose, and begin to wage the election a second time. No thanks, just STFU, OK? Game's over, you lost, go away.



    Wow another winner who is STILL bitter, angry, and nasty. Yep, surely a liberal thing. Not going to take a hike, thank you very much. I never made any political claims or predictions that were "knowingly false". They were predictions....they were wrong...and that was soooooo last week icon_rolleyes.gif Yes, I said "Heads would explode". You can only imagine how disappointing it was when one of the heads exploding turned out to be mine. OUCH! Shit happens. We move on. Maybe you should try to do that too. Not pretending even a little bit that I didn't lose. What are you, dense? I was on here almost immediately once the election was called not only offering congratulations, but willingly eating crow in a show of good sportsmanship. Why would I want to wage the election a second time? It's over! But, sorry, I won't STFU and I'm not going away.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 12, 2012 5:25 AM GMT
    This is going to get good. I want to see Boehner grovel, then lick the soles of the shoes of Pelosi, Reed, and then Obama.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 12, 2012 7:00 AM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    sfbayguy saidBoehner has said he remains opposed to increases in tax rates for rich people, but he isn't opposed to getting rid of loopholes and deductions. I say Obama should call his bluff (like Clinton did to Republican bluffs in the 90s) and propose drastic cuts in loopholes and deductions for rich people in exchange for extending all the Bush tax cuts.


    That's not calling Boehner's bluff. That's going along with exactly what Boehner desires in order to avoid taxes going up on those making over $250,000.

    Boehner has no leverage whatsoever. Read the article.

    Dude, eliminating deductions only for rich people increases their effective tax rate. Which I'd bet the Republicans don't want either. They are just proposing this option because they are betting that Obama won't go for it anyway.

    But hey, if we can avoid the fiscal cliff and have the Bush tax cuts expire just for the rich, then lets go for it. I'm just worried that every day that goes by without a solution is another day of uncertainty for everyone (hard to plan for the future) and another day closer to the fiscal cliff.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 12, 2012 7:57 AM GMT
    conservativejock saidI'm not sure what the big deal is about the "Bush Tax Cuts." Let them expire. That is of course what is about to happen. No big deal.

    And you don't see a problem that would cause, to have taxes increase for EVERYONE? Neither party wants that to happen. Why do you think they should let it happen?
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 12, 2012 1:20 PM GMT
    sfbayguy said
    coolarmydude said
    sfbayguy saidBoehner has said he remains opposed to increases in tax rates for rich people, but he isn't opposed to getting rid of loopholes and deductions. I say Obama should call his bluff (like Clinton did to Republican bluffs in the 90s) and propose drastic cuts in loopholes and deductions for rich people in exchange for extending all the Bush tax cuts.


    That's not calling Boehner's bluff. That's going along with exactly what Boehner desires in order to avoid taxes going up on those making over $250,000.

    Boehner has no leverage whatsoever. Read the article.

    Dude, eliminating deductions only for rich people increases their effective tax rate. Which I'd bet the Republicans don't want either. They are just proposing this option because they are betting that Obama won't go for it anyway.

    But hey, if we can avoid the fiscal cliff and have the Bush tax cuts expire just for the rich, then lets go for it. I'm just worried that every day that goes by without a solution is another day of uncertainty for everyone (hard to plan for the future) and another day closer to the fiscal cliff.


    No. Consider the tax deduction on private jets. Do all of the rich have private jets? NO! It doesn't necessarily apply all the same - it's a gimmick! And eliminating these deductions will do more to hurt the middle class, which is exactly what the Democrats argued during the election campaign and why Romney wasn't about to specify which ones he'd eliminate.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 12, 2012 1:22 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    coolarmydude said< The majority has spoken. The minority has no leverage.


    Maybe you should take a civics class icon_wink.gif



    Civics covers the processes of our democracy, like elections and the electoral college. My point was a political point.

    Maybe you should take a back seat and silently observe since you were clearly wrong about the election.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Nov 12, 2012 1:59 PM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    Maybe you should take a back seat and silently observe since you were clearly wrong about the election.


    No, I think I'll stay in the front row. I wouldn't want to miss anything icon_wink.gif
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Nov 12, 2012 2:16 PM GMT
    http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/11/12/15109551-in-debt-talks-failure-is-an-option
    In debt talks, failure is an option
    By Steve Benen - Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:00 AM CST

    President Obama and congressional leaders have about seven weeks until the end of the calendar year, at which point automatic spending cuts, which both parties oppose, will kick in, and all Bush-era tax cuts will expire. Policymakers seem to believe a debt-reduction agreement is still possible to avoid these measures, but it's an uphill climb.
    The dirty little secret, though, is plenty of Democrats seem to realize that a deal isn't entirely necessary.

    Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on Sunday said Democrats were prepared to allow the expiration of all George W. Bush-era tax rates if Republican lawmakers objected to raising taxes on the wealthiest.
    "We can't accept an unfair deal that piles on the middle class and tell them they have to support it. We have to make sure that the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share," said Murray on ABC"s "This Week."
    Murray said one option would be to let the lower rates expire across-the-board and then return to the table next year with new talks on a tax-cut package.


    Murray, who's likely to become the new chair of the Senate Budget Committee, specifically said if Republicans fail to compromise, "[W]e will reach a point at the end of this year where all the tax cuts expire and we'll start over next year. And whatever we do will be a tax cut for whatever package we put together. That may be the way to get past this."
    Quite right. It's easy to imagine the talks collapsing before New Year's Eve, and then President Obama proposing a new approach with the new Congress, focused on tax cuts for the middle class, and Clinton-era rates for income above $250,000. If it took a few weeks to pass, policymakers have the option of making it retroactive to Jan. 1.
    It would get the support of the Democratic Senate, and if House Republicans balk, they'd be responsible for higher middle-class taxes. Given this, Murray's comments yesterday offer a reminder of why the pressure is on the GOP, and why the White House need not accept a bad deal. One side has leverage, it's not the Republicans.