Budget Supercommittee Fails.

Indeed, I really want to see where this came from. I haven't seen anyone, anywhere, reporting that this was offered.

EDIT: Found it: http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/onair/transcripts/republicans_super_committee_tax_increases_111109/

The Republicans offered less of a tax increase than the one that will happen anyway. :rolleyes:

So a tax increase on everyone but the rich, pretty much like we said.

The rich can't afford to pay more taxes, they're busy creating jobs! The rest of you lowlifes can pay instead.
 
there was some rule that Warren Buffet came up with: get the GDP up or else congressmen start losing jobs. no benefits. sounds like a plan.
 
I'm glad it failed, but it looks like the horrible republicans want to scrap the mandatory cuts because they don't want their precious defense budget slashed.

Face it, defense spending needs to be cut. We no longer face Russia as a cold war enemy, why do we have such a large military? Seriously. It's time to go to pre WW2 levels. Keep a decent sized navy, but cut down the army to nothing. I'm for 50% of this budget cut cutting defense.

And entitlements need to be cut too. :goodjob:
 
No, it does not say that.

Actually it kind of does.

PBS said:
REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, (D) MARYLAND: I can`t get into all the details, but if you look at the public reports, what they`re proposing is actually a tax break for folks at the very top, compared to current law. That means if Congress did nothing, the folks at the very high end of the income scale would actually be paying significantly more in taxes than they are under their proposal. So, you got to take a look at it in that context.

Ball's in your court, Pat! Will you:

a) Hand-wave it away: "Oh he's wrong and I know this becau"
b) Stick to your guns and double down on the crazy: "N... n... no! I'm right! I must be! I'M INVINCIBLE!"
c) Surrender: "I was wrong and I admit that. I apologize for being a stubborn brick wall."
 
You are right, we are not facing Soviet Russia, that's why are Navy is half the size it was in 1991. Extrapolate to the rest of the services.

It would really be helpful, if people had some background knowledge in the things they use to make comparisons.
 
Actually it kind of does.



Ball's in your court, Pat! Will you:

a) Hand-wave it away: "Oh he's wrong and I know this becau"
b) Stick to your guns and double down on the crazy: "N... n... no! I'm right! I must be! I'M INVINCIBLE!"
c) Surrender: "I was wrong and I admit that. I apologize for being a stubborn brick wall."

Why exactly do I care what a democratic Congressmen says? Why did you quibble and quote a third party comment on the tax proposal instead of quoting the actual tax proposal?

Educate yourself

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/22/us-usa-debt-breakdown-idUSTRE7AL0E620111122
 
Why exactly do I care what a democratic Congressmen says? Why did you quibble and quote a third party comment on the tax proposal instead of quoting the actual tax proposal?

Educate yourself

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/22/us-usa-debt-breakdown-idUSTRE7AL0E620111122

I believe I asked you to link us to the proposal but you have been recalcitrant until now. Well done.

Reading the article, I see Democrats proposing a tax hike:

It opened with a discussion of a new Democratic proposal to raise taxes by $1 trillion, cut spending by $1 trillion, and spend another $300 billion to stimulate the economy.

And then I see the Toomey plan:

Toomey's proposal called for limiting tax deductions and claimed $250 billion in "static revenue" to be used for deficit reduction, and another $50 billion boost from greater economic activity as the result of reforming the tax code and lowering all tax rates.

It'd be nice to get a distillation of what this entails. Thanks, US Congress Joint Tax Committee!

Then Democrats say they received an analysis of Toomey's plan from the U.S. Congress's Joint Tax Committee which they say rendered the proposal unacceptable, because it would have represented "the largest percentage tax cuts for multimillionaires since Calvin Coolidge was president," in the early 1920s.

Uh oh, Pat, it's looking grim. :/
 
Basic math. Removing deductions means you push more taxes. Guess who benefits most from deductions and has the most available to them. For just one second check your recorded narrative at the door.
 
Basic math. Removing deductions means you push more taxes. Guess who benefits most from deductions and has the most available to them. For just one second check your recorded narrative at the door.
As a percentage of income, low-income married with children types.
 
Basic math. Removing deductions means you push more taxes. Guess who benefits most from deductions and has the most available to them. For just one second check your recorded narrative at the door.

Oh okay. Basic math. I'm sorry, I'll leave you alone now.

Everyone please ignore the quoted facts from the link that Patroklos sent me, they're wrong because of basic math, you see.
 
Is anybody really shocked? America deserves the negative effects of this failure.

Hopefully Obama does the right thing and prevents the legislature of wiggling out of this.
 
Two items of the Toomsday plan set to hurt the joe six pack:

- The tax benefits from excluding employer-provided health insurance from taxable income would be limited to 2 percent of taxpayer's adjusted gross income.

— A new measure of inflation would be used to adjust the tax brackets each year, resulting in more people jumping into higher tax brackets as their wages increase.
 
'Super committee' fails to reach agreement
By Ted Barrett, Kate Bolduan and Deirdre Walsh, CNN
updated 10:01 PM EST, Mon November 21, 2011





Rest of story HERE:


So the completely idiotic idea of a super committee to reach agreements when Congress can't has reached its entirely predictable outcome. Congress punted responsibility, and the country will pay the price.

I was deeply pissed off when this idea was passed in the first place. There was flat out no possibility of this ending well. So now that it has reached the predicted failure, it will likely tack another 1% on to the unemployment rate.

This will make things still worse for Obama by making things worse for all Americans. Which is clearly the plan.

Republicans will not pass any measure which is not class warfare. And the budget problem cannot be solved by crushing the middle class.

You don't think this was designed by Obama to happen? Aren't there triggered tax increases as well? Haven't they quarantined major social programs from the triggered cuts?

I'm not sure, but that was my reading earlier.
 
I'll just ignore the "GOP bad, Democrats good" rhetoric and skip to the topic at hand.

That said, I really wish the GOP was more willing to raise taxes. I'm all for them standing against soaking the rich, but this has become insane. They should strive for a lower-tax tomorrow and adjust the rates as needed for today.

Me personally, I'm just glad I'm pretty much fully vested in dividends stocks now. Capital gains are gonna be rocky for quite some time...

...well unless we get a margin account but that'll probably never happen.

there was some rule that Warren Buffet came up with: get the GDP up or else congressmen start losing jobs. no benefits. sounds like a plan.

Do you really want our government becoming even more corrupt? Politicians love their benefits just as much as everyone else in the country, and will find a way to make up the difference.

Welcome to Mexico 101, class! :p
 
Yeesh, the US is intensely partisan. I wonder how many of the supercommittee seats will be threatened due to their failure to create a compromise? Or will they all skate, because everyone blames the other 'side'?
 
I love the fact that Patroklos goes straight to the source to back up his (her?) points, and everyone else cites the opinions of Democratic legislators to back up theirs. Conservatives are called "the right" for a reason :lol:

But seriously, the failure of the super-congress is a good thing. It means that Republicans and Democrats alike have to see their sacred cows get slaughtered as a consequence of their unwillingness to compromise, and we won't be raising taxes in a recession (which would be economic suicide).
 
Yeah, Republicans did propose some additional tax revenue, but they demanded that it be accompanied by several trillions in additional tax cuts for the wealthy which would've actually made the deficit bigger.

That Republican staffer was right, the GOP isn't a political party interested in governing anymore, they're a cult. The cult of tax cuts.
 
That Republican staffer was right, the GOP isn't a political party interested in governing anymore, they're a cult.

So in other words, they've finally caught up to the Democratic Party?:lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom