The Fiscal Cliff thread.

[deejaydana]

I'll take Bill Gross' advice on where the economy is headed and why any day of the week over Obama and any person like him who is indifferent to the economy and business cycles.

[alexey]

Right, because nothing screams "market dynamics" like a congressional district.

I'm sure you can see some parallels between dynamics in politics and in the marketplace. Having to promote oneself, deal with competition, market and sell products, etc.

And it's not just the politicians and that congressional district you are talking about. There is a whole economic ecosystem around the political process. Look at talk radio, for example. Making money by selling horrible products without any concern for consumers or health of the overall system. Does that not remind you of something?

---------- Post added December-5th-2012 at 09:27 AM ----------

I'll take Bill Gross' advice on where the economy is headed and why any day of the week over Obama and any person like him who is indifferent to the economy and business cycles.

Ignoring the obviously incorrect statement about Obama's indifference to the economy, I'd suggest to possibly diversify your sources of information. This is not an either-or. Take it all in, sort it all out.

[deejaydana]

I'm sure you can see some parallels between dynamics in politics and in the marketplace. Having to promote oneself, deal with competition, market and sell products, etc.

And it's not just the politicians and that congressional district you are talking about. There is a whole economic ecosystem around the political process. Look at talk radio, for example. Making money by selling horrible products without any concern for consumers or health of the overall system. Does that not remind you of something?

---------- Post added December-5th-2012 at 09:27 AM ----------


Ignoring the obviously incorrect statement about Obama's indifference to the economy, I'd suggest to possibly diversify your sources of information. This is not an either-or. Take it all in, sort it all out.

Indifference to chosen sectors of the economy. How's that?

[JMS]

Pointing out that, while the current levels of deficit are almost 0% Obama's fault, they certainly aren't 100% W's, either.

The main reason for our current deficits is "the economy sucks".

Yeah, W's tax cuts increased the deficit some. So did the wars and the drugs. But mostly, it's the economy.

(And, while I think a case can be made that Republican policies are partially to blame for the economy sucking, IMO, that's a more tangential argument, and one that really can't be proven.)

The United States has the largest most diverse economy in the world. Our economy is far from sucking, it's the envy of the world. No nation on earth, not China, not Japan, not Germany would not trade their economy for our economy. PERIOD.
Our deficit and problems in our economy are 100% related to fiscal policy and mismanagement. The greatest by far of these policies is the misconception that defies all logic which the Republican party has subscribed too for the last 35 years. That the way to balance your budget and eliminate deficits is to reduce revenue. Again and again and again at both the national and state levels this has been proven to be a formula for massive unsustainable deficits. But like the people in the court watching a nude emperor sitting on his thrown few of our elected officials from either party have had the guts to call out the obvious fact Dude you are naked, and the GOP doesn't have a second graders understanding of how the economy works. This is it in a nut shell. Our biggest economic problem is mismanagement. It's the fact that record low tax rates while conducting two wars during an economic downturn and spending more on defense than the next 20 greatest nations combined; amazingly lead too unsustainable budget deficits.

We've seen this entire scenario play out on the state level in California... California who all buy itself is the 8th largest economy in the world if it were a country... yet it's government teeters on the edge of bankruptcy yearly. It's not that their economy is weak, far from it. It's that their tax rate is unsustainable low.. Record Setting LOW.... Hasn't Increased in 30 years. It's mismanagement. Since 1978 when proposition 13 passed the legislature has been unable to control tax rates.. Taxes in California are thus a rudderless ship changing dramatically since 1978. Property taxes for example are today about 1/3 rd the revenue they represented to the state in 1978. The bottom line is this prosperous state is going bankrupt and the uncertainty of irrational fiscal policies is impacting economic growth and basic services.

[alexey]

Indifference to chosen sectors of the economy. How's that?

I do not think "indifference" is the right word... or maybe it is... I suppose it depends if you are talking about lack of interest or lack of sympathy.

[JMS]

I'll take Bill Gross' advice on where the economy is headed and why any day of the week over Obama and any person like him who is indifferent to the economy and business cycles.

In September 2008, by holding large positions in agency backed mortgage bonds of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, (Bill) Gross's funds netted U.S. $1.7 billion after the Federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac[11] for which he had lobbied.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Gross

and I think you are going to have to give us a link from a reputable source which asserts Obama is " indifferent to the economy and business cycles." It's rather rich any Republican saying that given their leader in the senate is on record saying they would sink the entire country in order to deny Obama another four years in office months into his first term; and given the fact that the GOP behavior in the last debt ceiling crisis caused the nations triple A rating to be reduced to double A for the first time in our history.

[deejaydana]

It's telling to me JMS that nowhere in that last post do you mention entitlements being part of our problems. Our problems with this whole fiscal cliff deal is both sides making it purely political at the expense of all of us and to the detriment of the economy. I hold both sides accountable which apparently you don't or can't. I'm not sure what the post about Bill Gross is supposed to accomplish other than the fact he returned profits to his shareholders. He's also incredibiy philanthropic, maybe you could mention that in your next post.

[JMS]

Ignoring the obviously incorrect statement about Obama's indifference to the economy, I'd suggest to possibly diversify your sources of information. This is not an either-or. Take it all in, sort it all out.

Indifference to chosen sectors of the economy. How's that?

Alexey was referring to your statement from post #301..

Obama and any person like him who is indifferent to the economy and business cycles.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...cut-scenarios/

I found this illuminating.

Why are republicans ok with taxes going up on people "their way" but not others. Why are they ok with taxes going up MORE on people making less than 100K than the democrat plan?

[JMS]

It's telling to me JMS that nowhere in that last post do you mention entitlements being part of our problems.

BECAUSE THEY AREN'T PART OF THE PROBLEM !!!! Rather the GOP has been trying to roll back social security since it was first created and is taking this moment while the nation is in a crisis largely due to GOP actions, to yet again try to exploit the situation, sow FUD in order to achieve their long standing goal... a return to the "golden age" of America 1898 when 1 out of every 11 steel workers could expect to die on the job annually.

The Bush tax cut over the next 10 years will cost more than social security deficit is projected to cost the nation over the next 70 years!! But according the the GOP we have no money for 70 years but we have all the money in the world for the cuts...Social security is only about 70 years old. Clearly Social Security is not in crisis unless your crisis meter is entirely subjective... Hell social security won't even be a net negative on the treasury until 2037.

The program won’t have to turn to Congress for help or cut benefits until or unless the trust fund is exhausted, which the program’s actuaries don’t expect to happen until 2037
— and there’s a significant chance, according to their estimates, that that day will never come.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/op...gman.html?_r=0

Hell the entire thing can be put back into the black as is done every decade since inception with a little tweaking.


Yet the GOP is telling us we must privatize / or end this most successful of all government programs.. Oh, at least they tell us this when they aren't running for office between elections.
when they are running for office they tell us they are the trusted hands to protect this most popular of all government programs.

Medicare is absolutely the 1000 lb gorilla in the room. Medicare again which we heard a few months ago that the GOP would protect; is committed to protecting The major problem with medicare is our dysfunctional healthcare system which Medicare is built on top off. The entire healthcare system is dysfunctional. We've just spent 3 years with the GOP fighting to preserve that dysfunction unable to even acknowledge it.. unable to support a fiscally neutral proposal from the president in the short term which will yield the governing 100's of billions over the first 10 years and trillions over the second 10 years. You've got to deal with the underlying healthcare problem, not abandon seniors who are the most dependent upon system.

Bottom line though mismanagement, record low tax rates, and stagnation in the legislature which makes it impossible to even consider an idea from the Democratic party even if it's a rehashed republican idea are the core roots of our current fiscal mess.

Our problems with this whole fiscal cliff deal is both sides making it purely political at the expense of all of us and to the detriment of the economy. I hold both sides accountable which apparently you don't or can't. I'm not sure what the post about Bill Gross is supposed to accomplish other than the fact he returned profits to his shareholders. He's also incredibly philanthropic, maybe you could mention that in your next post.

Our problem with this whole fiscal cliff is one side is partisan hacks, and the other side is politically to incompetent to bring that to the nation's attention....

I mean did you read the house's proposal? They basically preserved the low tax rates on the wealthy, preserved the defense budget and made up all the sequestration savings by sticking it to the middle class..... This knowing if the Democrats do nothing the tax rates on the wealthy go up and the defense budget goes down. They brought nothing to the table. They excell only at sound bites and the crazy look in their eyes when you negotiate with them. Those crazy guy's really are willing to sink the nation... That's their strength... the irrational fear you get in your gut every time responsible people hear them speak.

Then they turn around and say Obama's position is insufficient given he's proposing $ 2 worth of cuts for every $ 1 worth of new revenue. I mean sure $ 2.50 or $ 2.75 would be better but the GOP isn't even discussing it.

[Elessar78]

Amen, jms. In 2009 Americans as a whole paid the lowest tax rates ever and the surrounding years have been equally as low. Yet, "strangely" the economy still goes up and down?? By conservative bull**** mountain logic It's because rates aren't low enough yet. If its low then shouldn't we be in this perpetual boom?

[twa]

it's fun watching liberals wanting the Bush tax cuts extended,I guess that 'it only went to the rich' meme was overstated?

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Amen, jms. In 2009 Americans as a whole paid the lowest tax rates ever and the surrounding years have been equally as low. Yet, "strangely" the economy still goes up and down?? By conservative bull**** mountain logic It's because rates aren't low enough yet. If its low then shouldn't we be in this perpetual boom?

Exactly.

I think we should raise rates on the wealthiest, which will give them incentive to work harder. By lowering their rates, they were able to make more money without trying as hard. In order to get our economy going, we have to raise rates on the wealthiest so they have to come up with new ways to make the same amount of money they are used to getting; thus improving the economy.

[Hubbs]

I'm sure you can see some parallels between dynamics in politics and in the marketplace. Having to promote oneself, deal with competition, market and sell products, etc.

I can also see "some parallels" between dynamics in politics and a totalitarian system. And yet, for some reason, I can't shake the feeling that if I used that fact to justify writing a drive-by post in which I threw together a bunch of vague negative-sounding concepts and ended it with "Government ", you would find that rather annoying.

And it's not just the politicians and that congressional district you are talking about. There is a whole economic ecosystem around the political process. Look at talk radio, for example. Making money by selling horrible products without any concern for consumers or health of the overall system. Does that not remind you of something?

This makes so little sense that I've just been sitting here staring at it for a couple of minutes now. You've jumped from supposed truths about macroeconomics to some sort of theory about a particular radio format somehow being inherently evil within only a couple of tweets' worth of characters. I think I'll just leave you with this:

[JMS]

Amen, jms. In 2009 Americans as a whole paid the lowest tax rates ever and the surrounding years have been equally as low. Yet, "strangely" the economy still goes up and down?? By conservative bull**** mountain logic It's because rates aren't low enough yet. If its low then shouldn't we be in this perpetual boom?

Yes that is my point. Our top tax rate not just in 2009 but today in 2012 and since 2001 are at at near historic lows. This hasn't lead to sustained economic prosperity but rather has directly added to unsustainable deficits.

Top Income Rate by Decade...
1940's -------------------------------85-95%
1950's--------------------------------91% - Ike
1960's--------------------------------75%
1970-----------------------------------70%
1980-----------------------------------50% - Ronald Reagan
1990-----------------------------------40% - Clinton
2000--2012--------------------------35% <----------------------------- Our Problem.

Dramatically Cutting Revenue to historically low levels... income taxes, corporate taxes, and capital gains have directly created the unsustainable nature of the deficits.




Having third world tax structures just aren't conducive to running a first world economy...



---------- Post added December-5th-2012 at 12:28 PM ----------

Exactly.

I think we should raise rates on the wealthiest, which will give them incentive to work harder. By lowering their rates, they were able to make more money without trying as hard. In order to get our economy going, we have to raise rates on the wealthiest so they have to come up with new ways to make the same amount of money they are used to getting; thus improving the economy.

Your argument is a sound bite from a previous era which is contextually nonsensical for today's discussion. Given the fact that if no agreement is reached... Taxes on the wealthy are going up.... why is it attractive for the GOP to hold cuts for 98% of the country hostage? That's the real discussion.... Tax cuts for 98% of the country will ruin the country.... We need cuts for the highest 2% or no cuts can be justified?....


How come you think 35% tax rate on the middle class gives them an incentive to work... but raising the total tax burden on Mitt Romney from 12.9% to 13.4% would decimate his work ethic?.... How come dumping on the middle class is perfectly acceptable to you?... but a very modest hike on super wealthy is worth putting the country back into a recession in order to avoid it?

---------- Post added December-5th-2012 at 12:39 PM ----------

You sir are a grand master in visual debate artifacts.