BS: Fiscal Cliff

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:39 AM

The Family and Business Tax Cut Certainty Act of 2012 was passed by a bipartisan committee with a vote of 19 to 5.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:40 AM

That was my post.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 10:57 AM

And the number of Dems vs Repubs? And who is the chair? ( i.e., which Dem. gets to decide what the committee considers?)



"Who serves on the Finance Committee?
The Finance Committee is currently comprised of 24 Members – 13 Democrats and 11 Republicans. The ratio of majority to minority Members on the Committee is based on the ratio of majority to minority Members of the Senate. Senators are assigned to specific committees by their party conference. Seniority and regional balance are some of the factors used to determine committee assignments."

http://www.finance.senate.gov/about/faq/#section_0

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 11:16 AM

Slice it the way you want: the vote was 19-5. So I guess the Republican members split on the vote, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 11:22 AM

Yes, they split. As did the House in passing the Senate bill. But that hardly makes it their responsibility, since the Dems had the votes to pas it on their own. To hold Reps responsible ( as Bobert does) when they are in the minority, and NOT hold the Dems ( in the majority of votes) at all accountable seems to be a little ..."biased"?- No, how about bigoted?

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 11:35 AM

Sorry, Beardie, spin it any way you like, bait and switch, change the subject & all the rest of your little tricks, but the Republicans are still the spoilers here.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 11:44 AM

Well, BBruce, I agree that the Democrats deserve their share of the Bad Management Award to do with the Senate. Now, about the House . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 11:53 AM

"Washington (CNN) -- The House of Representatives voted Tuesday night to approve a Senate bill to avert a feared fiscal cliff.
The measure that sought to maintain tax cuts for most Americans but increase rates on the wealthy passed the Democratic-led Senate overwhelmingly early in the day.
There was discussion about amending the Senate bill by adding spending cuts, but in the end, House lawmakers voted on the bill as written -- a so-called up or down vote."



"Following a day of hectic wrangling on Capitol Hill — where the prospects for passing the bipartisan, Senate legislation regarding the fiscal cliff hung in the balance for much of New Year's Day — the House voted 257 to 167 to pass the belated compromise measure over the objections of many conservative Republicans.
The legislation takes steps toward resolving the combination of automatic tax hikes and spending cuts that took effect at midnight on Jan. 1. It preserves tax rates as they were at the end of 2012, except for those individuals earning more than $400,000 and households earning over $450,000. It also allows taxes on capital gains and dividends to go up, and extends benefits of the unemployed. Additionally, the Senate bill delays the onset of the "sequester" — the swift, automatic spending cuts — for two months.

The House vote laid bare some of the internal ideological divisions to plague the GOP over the past two years. More Republican congressmen (151) voted against the Senate bill than for it (85), meaning that Democrats' support was needed to advance the final deal. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, took the rare step of casting a vote, and did so in favor of the legislation. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the former Republican vice presidential nominee, also supported the package. But Boehner's top two lieutenants, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., each opposed the deal."


"Fleming said he himself does not support the bill but thought it would be a "waste of time" to change it when Senate Democratic leaders have already said they would reject any amendments to the legislation. House Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier (R-Calif.) said the same earlier in the day. A Democratic aide, meanwhile, confirmed that addition amendments in the House "would just kill this thing," in the Senate.

Fleming was confident that most Republicans did not want to go down that road."

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 11:58 AM

"About 150 Democrats will support the Senate-passed fiscal cliff bill, assuming "we'll have enough Republicans to pass this thing," Rep. Norm Dicks, a Washington Democrat says. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a South Florida Democrat and chairman of the national party, says the bill will pass with an "overwhelming majority of Democratic
"

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 12:02 PM

That's all good, but it wasn't my question.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 12:22 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: beardedbruce - PM
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 12:17 PM

The MAJORITY of those voting for the bill in the house were Dems.

REST of posting removed to meet the mud elf censorship requirement.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 12:23 PM

My remark about the House and implied remark about Republicans pertained to the following:

"House GOP Lets Violence Against Women Act Passed By Senate Die Without A Vote"

The Republican Party which I think you support isn't much anymore regardless what you think of Democrats. They have worked hard to destroy America, imo, and at that they seem to be doing a credible job. I am not saying you support that BBruce, but neither have you spoken against it.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: beardedbruce
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 12:36 PM

"I am not saying you support that BBruce, but neither have you spoken against it."

I know nothing about it save the title- what is the content?

And I see a number of people here that have been loudly complaint about the Reps, and silent on the Dems doing what they are protesting- I scarcely think three minutes is enough time to read a 600 page plus bill, nor do I think that calls for transparancy that seem to igore the fact that the DEMOCRATS are the ones who are not being transparent indicates a fair viewpoint.



"In April, the Senate with bipartisan support passed a version of VAWA that extended protections to three groups of domestic violence victims who had not been covered by the original law, but House Republicans refused to support the legislation with those provisions, saying the measures were politically driven. Instead, they passed their own VAWA bill without the additional protections. In recent weeks, however, even some House Republicans who voted for the pared-down House bill have said they would now support the broader Senate bill -- and predicted it would pass if Republican leaders let it come to the floor for a vote.

....
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) had been guiding House negotiations on the matter, huddling with Republican congresswomen last month and even working directly with Biden to try to get a deal. House-Senate talks appeared to have broken down over House Republicans' refusal to accept a key protection for Native American women that was included in the Senate bill."

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 12:57 PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/02/violence-against-women-act-_n_2398553.html

You can read the article there, BBruce.

Up front, I haven't thought much of the Democrats for a few years now. But that doesn't mean I think much of the Republicans either. I look forward to 2014, and then maybe the USA will become a credible country again. Right now its politics are pretty much a laughing stock worldwide and it deserves better than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 01:14 PM

bb,

According to the Detroit Free Press the NASCAR pork was ordered up by minority whip, Republican Senator Jon Kyl (Arizona), Republican Senator Pat Roberts (Kansas), Democrat (in name only) Senator Ben Nelson and was fashioned after a request made last August by Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan) as part of an economic development plan for her state...

So, bottom line??? It wasn't Obama's idea at all... It was an idea pushed by 3 Senators representing "red states" and 1 Senator representing a "blue state"...

Bottom line, part 2??? It's no secret that NASCAR fans tend to be white, male, ultra-conservative and angry... Hmmmmmmm??? Sounds like a bone thrown to the Tea Party to me...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 01:15 PM

Major pork in the bill (most of these were actually carry-overs from several years ago)

link to PDF of the entire bill

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 02:04 PM

One man's pork is often the same man's economic stimulus----depending on where the money is going to.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 02:34 PM

I agree, dick...

In a fragile recovery 99% of economists will tell ya' to spend... I mean, this is what is taught in college economics courses across the country...

The 1% flat-earth economists who go their degrees from MOU (Mail Order University) say, "Pull back the reins"...

In 1937 the MOU and the Republicans badgered FDR into pulling back on the reins... If you look at GNP graphs from that decade you will plainly see that pulling back on the reins set the economic recover6y back a couple years...

BTW, this is called "Keynesian Economics" after the economist John Maynard Keynes who the flat-earthers, of course, hate...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 03:06 PM

It is not quite that simple.

You have a debt that must be serviced. Unless servicing that debt is part of your spending strategy. Budgets are not--or at least shouldn't be based on an outpouring of money. There are limits to growth, and few people are seeing that.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 03:07 PM

"In a fragile recovery 99% of economists will tell ya' to spend... I mean, this is what is taught in college economics courses across the country"

Also, if that is true, then your students who are now leading the country ain't learned shit!

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 03:42 PM

These folks are not economists, brucie... They are ideologues who couldn't pass a basic college Econ201 final exam... The economists tell them what needs to be done and get ignored or shouted down... You know, just like what happens when climatologists try to tell us what we need to do to stop global warming...

One such economist, a Nobel Peace Prize winner BTW, has been demonized by the right wing ideologues... His name is Paul Krugman and he represents real economics...

As for debt??? This ain't rocket surgery... You pay it off when times are good... George Bush inherited none only a balanced budget but a surplus... Did that mean we didn't have any debt??? Of course not... It meant that after servicing the existing debt and paying the federal government's bills there was money left over...

That money could have been used to sure-up the future of Social Security or gone toward infrastructure repairs... But no... The rich wanted it to supposedly create jobs??? How'd that work out???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Greg F.
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 03:52 PM

[Those] who are now leading the country ain't learned shit!

And there, Bruce , you have the TeaPublicans in a nutshell.

Ain't learned shit, don't know shit ('cept we gotta stop the United Natioons jack-booted Shock Troops from invading the U.S. & imposing Agenda 21)probably couldn't SPELL shit and are proud that they don't know shit.

vide Charles Pierce, Idiot America

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 04:04 PM

Yup...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: GUEST,999
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 04:09 PM

Paying down debt when times are good only works if governments budget for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Bobert
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 05:14 PM

That's my point, brucie... We had an opportunity to do just that in the early 2000s but Bush & Company decided that tax cuts were in order... If you recall, Alan Greenspan, who happens to understand basic economics, was against them until Bush & Company invited Alan over for some rubber hose treatment...

Real economist lost to ideologue "true believers"...

Seems that just about every policy for the last decade have "true believer-ism" stamped all over it...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 06:55 PM

"There are limits to growth, and few people are seeing that."

But everyone hopes we won't exceed the limit while THEY are in the market...

Too many businesses and budgets are built on the concept of growth. McDonald's can't comprehend NOT opening new outlets every year.
Entire countries need to expand roads, water plants, electric grids... etc. to accommodate rising populations... and if the population were to stabilize or drop, the burden on the young to support the old for a generation would be scary! Yet.... the earth won't support 63 trillion people. Math says it all WILL be adjusted... but few are willing to face the details when the 'adjustment' is beyond our control...not a pretty picture.

Subject: RE: BS: Fiscal Cliff
From: Songwronger
Date: 03 Jan 13 - 11:24 PM

The fiscal cliff deal
3 January 2013

http://wsws.org/en/articles/2013/01/03/pers-j03.html

Obama exemplified the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party in his remarks Tuesday night following passage of the bill by the House of Representatives. "A central promise of my campaign for president," he declared, "was to change the tax code that was too skewed towards the wealthy at the expense of working middle-class Americans. Tonight we've done that."

This is a lie. The bill actually makes permanent the income tax cuts for the rich instituted under Bush, with the exception of a modest increase in the rate for households making more than $450,000 a year....

...At the same time, the fiscal cliff bill raises taxes on 77 percent of households by allowing a 2 percent cut in the Social Security payroll tax to expire. A typical family earning $50,000 will pay an additional $1,000 in federal taxes in 2013.

Obama reiterated his commitment to attacking entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. Calling Medicare "the biggest contributor to our deficit," he pledged to "reform that program." He went on to speak of "further unnecessary spending in government that we can eliminate."