Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Is a fiscal deal emerging?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    the local pub
    Posts
    32,848

    Default Is a fiscal deal emerging?

    TNR. Mostly speculation still but here are the main points.
    There would be new revenue, slightly in excess of $1 trillion over ten years. The money would come from households with high incomes; exactly how high is not yet clear.
    ...
    There'd be cuts to spending, somewhat larger than what Obama put on the table. The deal would call for adjusting cost-of-living increases in Social Security, known as the "chained CPI," but it would not raise the Medicare eligibility age. The rest of the cuts would be unspecified, left for Congress to work out on its own. Some kind of automatic cuts would kick in if Congress failed to find the money.

    Boehner also proposed an incremental increase in nation's debt ceiling, effectively giving Treasury enough borrowing power to cover the government's bills for the next year.
    ...
    The deal would likely include some steps to help sustain the recovery—it would extend unemployment insurance, once again, and it would dedicate some money to infrastructure.
    Looks like can-kicking to me. If the cuts and revenue add up to $2 trillion to $2.5 trillion over 10 years then in about 2 years of trillion dollar deficits you're right back where you started.

    Going over the cliff would be preferable to such a deal.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    11,957

    Default

    Can-kicking looks like capitulation to me.
    Obama keeps taking less on taxes and adds more on cuts, while Boehner does nothing.

    I agree 100%, go over the cliff.

    Thanks to Republican Bush Law, taxes go back to where they were for EVERYONE. Cuts in military and discretionary spending, good. Hell, it's only like 8% cut on average.
    That's 0.8% cut to budgets per year for 10 years. That's LESS than growth rate, so all they're really talking about doing is reducing the amount of INCREASE by 0.8% a year.

    This is fine. It'll force the various departments to restructure how they work, get more efficient where they can, and then when the next President is elected in 4-years, they'll just raise the budgets on all those things anyway...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    15,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SemiAuto View Post
    TNR. Mostly speculation still but here are the main points.


    Looks like can-kicking to me. If the cuts and revenue add up to $2 trillion to $2.5 trillion over 10 years then in about 2 years of trillion dollar deficits you're right back where you started.

    Going over the cliff would be preferable to such a deal.
    I agree there should be deeper and more immediate cuts. Raising the age for Medicare doesn't really help much though.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Reality
    Posts
    40,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MithrilKnight View Post
    Can-kicking looks like capitulation to me.
    Obama keeps taking less on taxes and adds more on cuts, while Boehner does nothing.
    I agree.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Northwest of central
    Posts
    16,607

    Default

    And yet the right keeps complaining that Boehner is giving the farm away.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Puerto Rico
    Posts
    5,554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MithrilKnight View Post
    Can-kicking looks like capitulation to me.
    Obama keeps taking less on taxes and adds more on cuts, while Boehner does nothing.

    I agree 100%, go over the cliff.

    Thanks to Republican Bush Law, taxes go back to where they were for EVERYONE. Cuts in military and discretionary spending, good. Hell, it's only like 8% cut on average.
    That's 0.8% cut to budgets per year for 10 years. That's LESS than growth rate, so all they're really talking about doing is reducing the amount of INCREASE by 0.8% a year.

    This is fine. It'll force the various departments to restructure how they work, get more efficient where they can, and then when the next President is elected in 4-years, they'll just raise the budgets on all those things anyway...
    What cuts exactly is Obama talking about. He is including cutting the interest on the national debt as cutting spending???????

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Reality
    Posts
    40,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by flyboy56 View Post
    What cuts exactly is Obama talking about. He is including cutting the interest on the national debt as cutting spending???????
    Congress has already voted for 1.2 trillion in spending cuts.

    Obama shouldn't agree to any further spending cuts unless republicans agree to raise the debt ceiling

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soulflower View Post
    Congress has already voted for 1.2 trillion in spending cuts.

    Obama shouldn't agree to any further spending cuts unless republicans agree to raise the debt ceiling
    This is from the OP: Boehner also proposed an incremental increase in nation's debt ceiling, effectively giving Treasury enough borrowing power to cover the government's bills for the next year.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,399

    Default

    The defense budget lives of course. There is a catch, if Congress can't agree, automatic cuts. Congress can't agree on anything.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
The Baltimore Sun Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Search/Archive | Feedback | Contact Information | DC50tv |
Baltimore Sun | Chicago Tribune | Daily Press | Hartford Courant | LA Times | Orlando Sentinel | Sun Sentinel
The Morning Call | The Virginia Gazette
Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert Street, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore, MD 21278