The Fiscal Cliff

  • metta

    Posts: 39169

    Nov 14, 2012 8:56 PM GMT

    Stop calling it a ‘fiscal cliff’

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/stop-calling-it-a-fiscal-cliff-2012-11-14?siteid=nwhpf
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 14, 2012 9:26 PM GMT
    Fiscal cliff doesn't sound Keynesian, that's why it was picked.
  • metta

    Posts: 39169

    Dec 18, 2012 5:41 PM GMT
    Christmas comes early for Boehner

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/18/1171522/-Christmas-comes-early-for-Boehner
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14395

    Dec 18, 2012 5:54 PM GMT
    Want to avoid a fiscal clift, than the US needs to cut the defense budget by at least 50% and cut out all these expensive nation building expeditions. But the conservative republicans will never agree to ending American imperialism because all their wealthy buddies in the military industrial complex would end up in poverty.
  • metta

    Posts: 39169

    Dec 19, 2012 2:41 AM GMT
    President Obama: Don't cut Social Security

    http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=280&tag=1218em6
  • metta

    Posts: 39169

    Dec 27, 2012 2:05 AM GMT
    Nation not impressed by Republicans' fiscal cliff follies

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/26/1173979/-Nation-not-impressed-by-Republicans-fiscal-cliff-nbsp-follies
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 27, 2012 2:47 AM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidWant to avoid a fiscal clift, than the US needs to cut the defense budget by at least 50% and cut out all these expensive nation building expeditions. But the conservative republicans will never agree to ending American imperialism because all their wealthy buddies in the military industrial complex would end up in poverty.


    How many cliches can you really fit in two sentences?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 27, 2012 7:19 AM GMT
    I don't really know so much about the fiscal cliff. I've been reading about it in the news, but can someone explain to me what the "Fiscal Ciff" is?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 27, 2012 7:38 AM GMT
    I bet a lot of people don't realize "Fiscal" is a word and have been saying "physical cliff". icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 27, 2012 5:31 PM GMT
    Walter92 saidI don't really know so much about the fiscal cliff. I've been reading about it in the news, but can someone explain to me what the "Fiscal Ciff" is?


    cliff_s640x805.jpg?67176753ec84dd0cb8fed
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 27, 2012 7:13 PM GMT
    Oh my god, we're going to have to pay more in taxes. Oh dang. AND they will cut back on military spending? Probably end up raising the retirement age to a more honest number like 70 or 72, since people live longer and save less? Probably do some sort of means testing for social security too? Oh heck, I am all for it then.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Dec 28, 2012 8:24 AM GMT
    Walter92 saidI don't really know so much about the fiscal cliff. I've been reading about it in the news, but can someone explain to me what the "Fiscal Ciff" is?



    Unless Congress passes legislation (and the President signs it) to change things, as of January 1, 2013, the "Bush tax cuts" will automatically end, everybody's taxes will go up, and there will be automatic spending cuts in a number of areas.

    I am all for letting it happen.
    Then, the Senate can pass legislation to cut taxes for all but the rich, and dare the Republicans in the House of Representatives to vote it down.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 28, 2012 9:13 AM GMT
    VVC4r.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 28, 2012 10:54 AM GMT
    Look, for those of us that know a thing or two about economics, the LONG TERM effects aren't the problem. In particular, because economic models of the LONG TERM are rarely even remotely accurate and because government debt isn't like household debt: the government controls the supply of money.

    The ramifications of a decrease in spending equivalent to 5%, from reduced demand and government spending, ought to be obvious: growth last year was around 2%.

    The cuts and tax increases will therefore precipitate a cut in GDP of around 3%. That may not sound like much, but it's of the order of the decline in 2008 and 2009. Such a dramatic cut will plunge the USA economy back into recession and destroy wealth. YOUR WEALTH.

    Every one of you who owns a pension, owns stocks, has any wealth of any short ought to be calling your representatives to stop this idiotic and entirely politically manufactured crisis.

    It's certainly true that the deficits of recent years are not sustainable, but the time to cut public spending and raise taxes is NOT WHEN WE'RE COMING OUT OF A RECESSION!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 28, 2012 12:57 PM GMT
    TigerTim saidLook, for those of us that know a thing or two about economics, the LONG TERM effects aren't the problem. In particular, because economic models of the LONG TERM are rarely even remotely accurate and because government debt isn't like household debt: the government controls the supply of money.

    The ramifications of a decrease in spending equivalent to 5%, from reduced demand and government spending, ought to be obvious: growth last year was around 2%.

    The cuts and tax increases will therefore precipitate a cut in GDP of around 3%. That may not sound like much, but it's of the order of the decline in 2008 and 2009. Such a dramatic cut will plunge the USA economy back into recession and destroy wealth. YOUR WEALTH.

    Every one of you who owns a pension, owns stocks, has any wealth of any short ought to be calling your representatives to stop this idiotic and entirely politically manufactured crisis.

    It's certainly true that the deficits of recent years are not sustainable, but the time to cut public spending and raise taxes is NOT WHEN WE'RE COMING OUT OF A RECESSION!


    Yes because Keynesian economics works out so well? Your claim that the Long Term effects aren't a problem just because government controls the supply of money - is an absurd way of suggesting that the government can and should default on its obligations by printing money. Ever heard of inflation? You don't think that could possibly be an issue?

    Here's what Obama proposes - Obama's plan would bring spending from $3.62 trillion in 2013 to $5.63 trillion in 2022 - which is a spending increase of 55% over the next decade. This also ignores the massive and growing social security deficit that is kept off the books.
    image001-3.preview.png

    Yes, the fiscal cliff should be avoided but it's not a negotiation when one side isn't willing to give anything. In what could be pretty much the phrase that summarizes the governing philosophy for this Administration, this was supposedly the exchange that happened during the fiscal cliff talks:

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324731304578193770576333616.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

    Mr. Obama repeatedly lost patience with the speaker as negotiations faltered. In an Oval Office meeting last week, he told Mr. Boehner that if the sides didn’t reach agreement, he would use his inaugural address and his State of the Union speech to tell the country the Republicans were at fault.

    At one point, according to notes taken by a participant, Mr. Boehner told the president, “I put $800 billion [in tax revenue] on the table. What do I get for that?”

    “You get nothing,” the president said. “I get that for free.”


    Government spending must be reduced - and radically in the US particularly in light of the massive and rising unfunded liabilities. And given that you seem not to have grasped this point earlier, I think Dan Mitchell puts it in terms even you can understand:


    What's perhaps the most laughable part of your comment here is that you start out with the claim that you know a thing or two about economics.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 28, 2012 4:17 PM GMT
    *amused at Riddler's strutting and preening in front of TigerTim, because if he knew more about TT he'd be rather embarrassed*
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 28, 2012 4:48 PM GMT
    meninlove said *amused at Riddler's strutting and preening in front of TigerTim, because if he knew more about TT he'd be rather embarrassed*


    Enough to know that the quality of his arguments are absurd and laughable on their face. You apparently missed his opening salvo that in the long term the government is fine because it can print its way out of this debt. As if that won't have any consequnces. That being said, his ideas are consistently of a much higher quality and standard than your own. I wish I could say that was a compliment to him.

    Irrespective of his education and history, he has just become another predictable liberal who consistently advocates for failed policies. You'd think that this was predictable based on the advanced math modelling that he apparently can do.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Dec 28, 2012 6:47 PM GMT
    SIGH ......

    To those who are saying that going over the "The thing that Government has created to make the economy quiver in its boots" wouldn't be so bad

    There is austerity and there is this thing which is austerity on steroids
    Not ONLY is it the dumbest idea to come across in say decades ... thank you republican party ... AGAIN

    but if it goes into effect it will almost GUARANTEE a recession

    so when you're contemplating what this republican congress has done .... which is less than nothing ... they have been the least effective congress in the history of the legislature
    you can add this to their resume
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 28, 2012 7:11 PM GMT
    fiscaloffers3.jpg
    Looks like give and take here--except when Boehner dropped off his Plan B.

    And no, the extra $800 billion revenue is free, because there was already major cutting baked into the cake with the negotiations last year in the Budget Control Act, to the tune of $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/19/how-the-cuts-from-2011-are-undermining-the-deal-in-2012/

    And how much is US GDP going to grow in the next 10 years?
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Dec 28, 2012 7:35 PM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidfiscaloffers3.jpg
    Looks like give and take here--except when Boehner dropped off his Plan B.

    And no, the extra $800 billion revenue is free, because there was already major cutting baked into the cake with the negotiations last year in the Budget Control Act, to the tune of $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/19/how-the-cuts-from-2011-are-undermining-the-deal-in-2012/

    And how much is US GDP going to grow in the next 10 years?


    Yeah there's give ad take .... more give on the part of Obama
    but that's another story
    But Boehner is negotiating without anyone standing behind him
    He can negotiate all he wants but his crew back at the House ain't gonna vote for ANYTHING

    Dysfunction Junction what's my Function
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 29, 2012 12:51 AM GMT
    q1w2e3 saidLooks like give and take here--except when Boehner dropped off his Plan B.

    And no, the extra $800 billion revenue is free, because there was already major cutting baked into the cake with the negotiations last year in the Budget Control Act, to the tune of $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/19/how-the-cuts-from-2011-are-undermining-the-deal-in-2012/

    And how much is US GDP going to grow in the next 10 years?


    A negotiation requires well give and take - why would the extra $800 billion be free given that it's baked in? By that logic, everything is baked in with respect to what happens in a supposed fiscal cliff. There was an expectation in the Budget Control Act that this was an issue they would kick out to the end of this year and hence these negotiations. And to factor in the cuts is absurd - most of those "cuts" were imaginary to begin with - given that growth was already significantly faster than inflation / accounting trickery. To suggest that Boehner should simply bend to Obama's will because he won is absurd given that the Republicans were also given a maintained majority in the house. I suspect voters knew what they were doing.

    The US GDP is expected to grow in the low single digits particularly given forecasts have already been significantly more than what's happened. Just in case you've forgotten:
    http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/121211-594554-president-obama-extends-economy-blame-to-bill-clinton.htm

    • On Feb. 2, 2009, Obama told the "Today Show" that "a year from now I think people are gonna see that we're starting to make some progress," and that "if I don't have this done in three years, then there's going to be a one-term proposition."

    On Feb. 12, 2009, he predicted that his $830 billion stimulus would "ignite spending by businesses and consumers" and unleash "a new wave of innovation, activity and construction ... all across America."

    • On Feb. 26, 2009, Obama's first budget projected that by 2011 the economy would be cooking ahead at 4% real GDP growth, with unemployment at 7.1% and falling fast.

    • On Feb. 7, 2010, he said "we are seeing the corner turn and the economy growing again."

    • On June 4, 2010, Obama claimed the "economy is getting stronger by the day" and later that month said the recovery was "well under way


    And so the Obama Administration tries to do it again. They factor in spending with borrowed funds in anticipation of growth that given their policies is questionable at best if history is any guide. What's that definition of insanity again?
  • metta

    Posts: 39169

    Jan 02, 2013 2:16 AM GMT
    House Agrees To Vote On Fiscal Cliff Deal Tonight

    http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/house-fiscal-cliff-vote.php
  • metta

    Posts: 39169

    Jan 02, 2013 4:06 AM GMT
    Obama Gets a Big Win as House Republicans Get Buried by Fiscal Cliff Cave In

    1578_514076438615061_1223877491_n.jpg

    http://www.politicususa.com/obama-big-win-house-republicans-buried-fiscal-cliff-cave.html
  • metta

    Posts: 39169

    Jan 02, 2013 4:22 AM GMT
    Obama speaking live:

    http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nbcnews.com/50336044/?ocid=twitter#50336044

    Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy