You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
No breakthrough in Obama, Boehner fiscal cliff talks
2012-12-11
[Iran Press TV] US President Barack Obama
I mean, I do think at a certain point you've made enough money...
and Republican House Speaker John It is not pronounced 'Boner!' Boehner
... the occasionally weepy leader of House Republicans...
have discussed the ways to avoid the so-called "fiscal cliff," but reached no deal to tackle Washington's deficit woes.

The White House said after the Sunday talks that "the lines of communication remain open," but it gave no details on the negotiations.

The Democrats and Republicans are trying to reach a deal to stop automatic spending cuts and tax increases, which will take effect on January 1, 2013, if no deal is reached.

Obama's most recent proposal to stave off the "fiscal cliff" calls for USD 1.6 trillion in new revenues, achieved in part by letting the Bush-era tax cuts expire for the wealthiest Americans, as well as USD 600 billion in spending cuts and a handful of other measures.

The Republicans have put forward a counter offer that is made up of USD 900 billion in spending cuts and USD 800 billion in new revenues achieved through tax reform that precludes rate increases.

The White House says it will not accept a deal unless tax rates for the wealthiest Americans rise.

The Republicans, however, say that tax hikes would hurt a still fragile economy.

On Friday, Boehner accused Obama of recklessly pushing the US to the fiscal brink over tax hikes, saying the deficit talks had "no progress."

Meanwhile,
...back at the sandwich shop, Caroline was experimenting with ingredients of increasing volatility...
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde has said that the US needs a balanced and comprehensive approach regarding the looming "fiscal cliff" to tackle its deficit woes.

"The best way to go forward is to have a balanced approach that takes into account both increasing the revenue, which means, you know, either raising taxes or creating new sources of revenue, and cutting spending," said Lagarde in an interview on Sunday.
Posted by:Fred

#11  Because the unionistas are thin-skinned?
Posted by: SteveS   2012-12-11 19:56  

#10  Use of Remington-870's and #6 shot authorized as far as I am concerned.

#6?

Really, Besoeker?

Why so small? I use bigger on seaducks and geese.
Posted by: no mo uro   2012-12-11 19:52  

#9  youtube has some good vids of unionistas doing what they do best...I'm sure it will endear them to the avg joe in MI. As soon as MI passes the anti-CAIR legislation I will be proud of my home state again. This RTW bill was a step in right direction...
Posted by: Broadhead6   2012-12-11 16:33  

#8  ..or whiff of grape. Known to work on the Paris crowds.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-12-11 10:31  

#7  I particularly enjoyed the Michigan State Police spokesman who said... "we will not allow the protests to become a Wisconsin situation".

Use of Remington-870's and #6 shot authorized as far as I am concerned.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-12-11 10:12  

#6  B, The left ought to love the principle of "choice" since they embrace it is so many other contexts.
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-12-11 10:00  

#5  Hat tip to the brave Governor and people of Michigan as they pass the "Right to Work" legislation.

Strange is it not, "choice" is a sacred, ethical principle of freedom or entitlement... unless used in the context of... "Right to Work" ?
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-12-11 09:56  

#4  Well, they are not too good at math in Washington.
Posted by: JohnQC   2012-12-11 09:51  

#3  1. Revoking the Bush era cuts for >$250k income only produces $35B to $60B per year. I don''t see how this sums to $1.6T over 10years.

2. Back in 2000, the Defense budget was about $300B. Granted that probably wasn't enough but now the Defense budget is about $700B. After the drawdown in Afghanistan, it seems we could get by on $500 without too much trouble.

3. Its a shame we can't get smart Bain types or retired Fed employees to go through the discretionary budget and get rid of the fluff. However, in many agencies (Patent and Trade, Passport and VISA office, etc.), there simply isn't much fluff.
Posted by: lord garth   2012-12-11 09:43  

#2  Unless and until we have a political party which will cut non-defense spending by 40-75% and is prepared - really prepared - to deal with the potential short-term unrest this will cause - the country will continue to decline and may end up being destroyed.

I suspect a deal has already been reached to go off the cliff.

Boehner, the quintessential country club Republican, desires defense cuts (as many RINO's do) but cannot overtly push for them, it would be political suicide. Also, he does not wish to offend any of the groups who get the magic checks who aren't affiliated with the defense industry. Going off the cliff is the perfect fig leaf for him in both of those areas, plus he can claim he tried to protect the wealthy job creators but Obama wouldn't budge, so he can blame the next recession on someone else.

Obama, as Besoeker says, also wants to gut the defense infrastructure of this country and use the revenue so obtained to buy more votes with more entitlement/welfare/public sector jobs he can hand out as a result. When tax rates go up on everybody and the next recession occurs, he can blame the Republicans for it, saying that all the jobs lost were due to the cuts mandated by the fiscal cliff.

Going off the cliff is a win/win for these two.

So that is what will happen.
Posted by: no mo uro   2012-12-11 06:35  

#1  Defense cuts which will further weaken America. It was the Champ's endgame strategy all along.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-12-11 02:42  

00:00