Skip to main content

Nearly every media outlet is saying the fiscal cliff deal is a good debt.  As Lawrence O'donnell said tonight that it is the 'best' deal that Democrats could negotiate from Republicans.

That is probably true.  But that is only true because of the word negotiate.

If Democrats didn't negotiate at all, all the Bush tax cuts would have expired and that revenue woul have tripled.

I just cannot believe the idea that this compromise was a win for Democrats.

I've done the math about the amount of revenue that was compromised away for the sake of 30 billion in unemployment extensions.

Republicans won this battle because they achieved an enormous decrease in tax increases on the wealthy.

Democrats lost because they voted for a tax decrease for the wealthy.  A permanent one.

Not to mention the rest of the tax decreases which were voted for by Democrats.

Don't be fooled by the media.  Republicans voted for the permanent tax cuts for the wealthy and won.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't think you are seeeing the bigger picture . (9+ / 0-)

    And I think that might just be intentional .

    "Drop the name-calling." Meteor Blades 2/4/11

    by indycam on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 07:55:48 PM PST

    •  Intentional? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kurt, Words In Action

      I do see the bigger picture.

      What it comes down to for me is this.

      Nearly all Democrats agree that the Bush tax cuts harmed this country and continue to harm this country.  I agree.

      Twice now they have had the chance to let those taxes expire.  Twice they voted to extend those tax cuts.

      How can Democrats vote to continue a policy they themselves believe to harm the country.

      Which is worse for our economy, the continuation of these tax cuts or the expiration of extended unemployment coverage?

      The answer to that is more complicated for me to unravel, but if the tax cuts contributed to the financial crisis and the crisis caused the loss of jobs, can we solve the problem if we don't address the cause?

      If you get a splinter that causes an infection, you don't just treat the infection.  You have to remove the splinter as well.

      •  What was the tax rate on those earning >400K ? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AreDeutz, sewaneepat

        What will it be after the vote ?

        The tax rate for the low income person was ?
        What will it be after the vote ?

        Are you a democrat ?
        If not , how are you registered ?
        Your hate for Democrats in your last diary and this diary makes me wonder .  

        "Drop the name-calling." Meteor Blades 2/4/11

        by indycam on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 08:20:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  one can be disappointed in Democrats and not (4+ / 0-)

          hate them.

          I'm continually dismayed. I find myself wondering why the two parties don't merge and allow other parties to be bourne out of that. It doesn't feel like there is any party which is really to the left, anymore. And it feels like everything they do always turns out to serve the big corps and exceptionally wealthy far more than anything serves those below the top 5%.

          95% of the income in the last few years has gone to the top 1 or 2%. The disparity in financial class continues to grow. More and more people are giving up on ever getting a job.

          I've yet to see the Dems fight really hard for any of this to move in a different direction.

          I don't hate Dems. I'm damned disappointed in them and wish they would start fighting for what is really needed. I've lost faith that it will happen, though, as long as we don't have campaign finance reform. I'm tired of debating the particulars of this deal or that deal, when the winds are not changing because both parties are actually beholden to monied interest who only ensure that they get re-elected if their agendas are met.

          And I'm tired of people pounding on those of us who don't like the direction we've watched the Democratic Party move in since the 90s. If I go to the oral surgeon and hire him to work on my gums, but I get in the chair, get the anesthesia and he starts working on my hands, I have every right to be dismayed and to have buyers remorse.

          I'm tired of hearing one agenda in a campaign and then seeing either no real effort to fight for that voter-supported agenda or worse, see an opposite agenda pursued (executive power/civil liberties/security.) Why am I treated as the problem when this is what has been happening?

          •  Was I talking about you or someone else ? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            TFinSF, Neuroptimalian

            http://www.dailykos.com/...

            but screw you Democrats.
            democrat bullshit
            democrat failure
            democrat lies
            The hate is real .

            "Drop the name-calling." Meteor Blades 2/4/11

            by indycam on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 08:57:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I read anger and disappointment. why do (0+ / 0-)

              you insist on defining it as hate?

              doesn't that just give you an excuse to ignore the reasons the person may be expressing those emotions?

            •  also, I feel quite strongly that when a person (0+ / 0-)

              is attacked personally, rather than having their ideas addressed, it is incumbent on others to step in and not just leave the one attacked to defend themselves against that kind of energy. Turning the exchange into one where the diarist has to defend against the accusation of hating is not appropriate.

            •  That's not hate by the way. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              UnaSpenser, DeadHead, DarkestHour

              That is utter and complete disappointment.

              Democrats failed miserably when they could have succeeded admirably.

              Go back further further and read my diaries in which I championed Democrats.

              I'm a Democrat and much of that disappointment is directed at myself for being a chump.

              Can I not feel betrayed by my own party?

              Am I supposed to champion every decision from my party?

              If I did that, I'd be no better than Republicans who dont criticize GWB's decisions.

              I can't be that person.

              •  It really does not seem like you are a democrat . (0+ / 0-)

                You talk about how they let you down .
                You talk as if they are others .
                You have talked stink about Democrats .  

                Democrats failed miserably when they could have succeeded admirably.
                Did you watch the speeches before the vote ?
                Did the tax rate go up on the rich / > $400k ?
                Or did the tax rate as you claim go down on the > $400k ?

                How do you feel that grover's pledge has been broken ?
                How do you feel about the rich being told their tax rates are going up ?
                How do you feel about the republican votes for increased taxes on the rich ?
                How do you feel about the republicans tearing into each other today over their votes ?

                I see none of that in you diary , all I see is you talking stink about Democrats .
                None of the good and all of the bad is a funny way to go about it , this diary and yesterdays made me wonder if you are actually a troll .

                "Drop the name-calling." Meteor Blades 2/4/11

                by indycam on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 09:37:32 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Everyone needs to make their own judgement. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  DeadHead

                  All I can ask of you is not to base your judgement on just one single entry of mine  expressing my frustration.

                  To answer your questions though, I'm a Democrat and as one I find it my duty to call out my own party when I think they've done wrong.

                  If you review my entries you may find all too many criticisms and outbursts regarding Republicans and their party.

                  I lay blame as equally as I can.  

                  If I only criticized one party I wouldn't be a Democrat.

        •  I'm a Democrat. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          UnaSpenser, DeadHead, DarkestHour

          My hate for Democrats?  How dare you state hate as a reason for my critique.

          Are you a Democrat?  Democrats I know don't pull out the hate word so readily.  Myself included.

          I have problems when Democrats I voted for give up on their campaign promises and the rejoice as if they won a competition against Republicans.

          By the way, the vote occurred on Jan 1st, so technically and legally, the Bush tax cuts had expired.  So tax rates on >$400,000 didn't change at all so the vote didn't have any affect on those rates.

          If you'd like to read the full transcript of the new American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 here's a link.

          http://www.businessinsider.com/...

          It's interesting reading and may explain a few things.

      •  The Bush tax cuts (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pistolSO, sewaneepat

        made no sense when the economy was doing well. When the economy is doing poorly, however, we need to run a big deficit to stimulate the economy. Since Republicans blocked additional stimulus spending, we have to settle for tax cuts. This is Economics 101; basic Keynesian theory. The most important thing is to keep running big deficits for awhile. Funny thing is that Republicans seem to agree with at least part of this.

        As to cutting taxes on the wealthy, we succeeded in raising the top bracket back to 39% where it was in the 1990's. You want to quibble about where that bracket should start, fine, but I don't see that as cutting taxes for the wealthy. And don't forget about the increase in the capital gains tax up to 20%. That is a major achievement. That by itself will cost people like Mitt Romney about a million bucks a year.

        •  That sounds more like Politics 101. (0+ / 0-)

          Economics says to increase revenue and increase spending.

          Tax cuts may stimulate an economy in the short term, but if the tax cuts were a major cause of the problem in the first place then a time would come when those taxes needed to go back up.

          Congress just made those taxes permanent.  How does that help?

          What's soon to happen is the real austerity measures.  Cutting entitlement programs.  When that happens we'll really have a problem.

          •  You were not paying attention in Econ class (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Lestatdelc, sewaneepat

            on the day they discussed fiscal policy. If you want to stimulate the economy, the most important thing, according to Keynes, is the size of the deficit. A good argument can be made that government spending does more good than cutting taxes, but still the most important thing is that the government is spending more than it is taking in. If you increase government spending, and also increase taxes to cover the increase, then the effects of one are cancelling out the other.

            And permanent does not mean permanent by the way. It just means there is no expiration date on these tax rates, as there was with the Bush tax cuts.

  •  Have you been watching the GOP today? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sewaneepat

    They lost.   The GOP is deeply divided and they are fighting with each other.   The Democrats on the other hand are united.

    And Obama, Biden, Reid and Pelosi got Republicans to vote for a tax increase!    They haven't voted for one in 22 years.  

    I also think you are underestimating how the markets would have taken a dive had a deal not been reached, and how much suffering 2 million people would have had to go through because their UI benefits ran out.   State legislatures would have had to make big spending cuts because of the sequester and if we use the 2-months of extra time to deal with that to avoid that kind of austerity, that would be a good thing for this country.

    Washington and Colorado said that you've got to legalize it. Hope the DOJ respects that.

    by pistolSO on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 08:50:34 PM PST

    •  The bowl games were yesterday (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      UnaSpenser

      and that's where won or lost matters.

      What matters with this legislation is whether it's good or bad as a national policy and for the American people. The diarist is arguing that it's bad because it amounts to a tax cut for the wealth (and a tax increase on the middle class with the elimination of the 2% FICA cut).

      If you think the wealthy should be getting a tax break - not only on rates and brackets, but on capital gains, estate tax and carried interest, then argue why that's a good policy.

      Don't hide behind speculation about markets or state budgets or whatever other "crystal ball" arguments you have, or arguments about what could or could not have been negotiated, when you know jack shit about what went on in negotiations.

      Is this good policy or not? Why?

      In Soviet Russia, you rob bank. In America, bank robs you.

      by badger on Wed Jan 02, 2013 at 08:58:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I haven't been watching the GOP today. (0+ / 0-)

      But I have been watching the media repeat over and over again how the GOP is in complete turmoil and fighting with each other.

      I've seen Gov. Christie blame the House Republicans for not passing a bill for aid to Sandy victims.

      I've read that Boehner told Reid to F@&$ off.

      But I really haven't seen any infighting from Republicans over their fiscal deal vote.

      Can you point me in that direction?

  •  Did you not watch the show at all? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Anima, pistolSO, snapples, Anokris

    Lawrence O'Donnell not only pointed out that Nancy Pelosi & Chuck Schumer were in favor of extending the Bush cuts for earners of $1 M and below, he also played clips of both saying exactly that on live TV!

    Obama had to negotiate WITH HIS OWN PARTY TOO!

    And he got the cut-off down to 400 K!!!

    Reality to diarist: Wake up!

  •  I must say I find this diary (0+ / 0-)

    to be fairly confusing.

    •  Why? (0+ / 0-)

      The media is saying that Democrats won the day by negotiating this bill with Republicans.

      I'm saying that Republicans won because they were able to get a tax decrease across the board.  Plus I've read the bill and it's pretty shocking to me.

      •  If you have read the bill, (0+ / 0-)

        why did you say that the only thing Dems got in return was 30 billion in UI? You ignore the EITC, the tuition tax credit, the child tax credit, the farm bill, The green energy credits, and the putting off of the sequester.

        The reason for keeping tax rates low on the majority of people is that raising them would lead to a recession and unemployment to rise to 9+%, according to most economists.

        You can't scare me, I'm sticking to the Union - Woody Guthrie

        by sewaneepat on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 04:56:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I read the bill. (0+ / 0-)

          The reason why I did not include all of the  Tax Credits you mention is because they are Tax Credits and are usually supported by Republicans.

          Nearly every Tax Credit has been supported or even created by Republicans, at least at the beginning.  The EITC is proven to be a means to stimulate jobs and that's not what Republicans want.

          Implying that Republicans disapprove of tax credits is just playing into Republican hands.

          •  Not understanding your logic here. (0+ / 0-)
            The EITC is proven to be a means to stimulate jobs and that's not what Republicans want.
            And then you say that Republicans support tax credits and it is playing into their hands to suggest they don't. Don't understand this sentence - they support it but want you to think they don't?

            Yes, Nixon started the EITC but Republicans today don't like it (see their comments during the last election about people who do not pay income taxes). But the Child tax credit was passed under Clinton (with Republican support but they attack it now, see Rubio and Vitter's attempt to politicize it) and the Tuition tax credit was Obama's (with essentially no Republican support).

            You can't scare me, I'm sticking to the Union - Woody Guthrie

            by sewaneepat on Fri Jan 04, 2013 at 06:08:44 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Have you read the Grover Norquist pledge? (0+ / 0-)

              If you read the pledge it states that there will be no net reduction in tax deductions and credits.

              So Republicans do like tax credits.  The tax credits which help the poor and middle class are the credits they don't like and complain about, but won't vote against.

              Republicans force Democrats to compromise and give these credits up as long as there is a dollar for dollar reduction in other tax rates.

              If you read and understand that statement, republicans are willing to stop credits, which the middle class as long as they reduce other tax rates.  And those other reductions in tax rates usually help the wealthiest.

              Are you getting it now?  If we reduce credits that help the poor to help the debt, we must reduce taxes for someone else which will cancel out any relief on the debt.

              Republicans like tax credits but only certain tax credits.

              You get this?

  •  The Tax Rate Increased Last Night.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sewaneepat

    from 35% to 39.6% for those earning over $450,000.00.  How many people does the diarist know who are bringing  home that kind of money?  Hundreds?  Thousands?  Millions?

    It's revenue, baby.  Anyway you cut it.  Anyway you count it.  

    For some reason, Republicans thinks they got skunked.....plus they voted to raise taxes.  It's the first time in 22 years.  Something or somebody got them to do that.  

    The House is ticked at Mitch McConnell.  Boehner refuses to ever negotiate w/ Obama again.  Ever.  Ever again.

    Hmmmmm.....if he got such a good deal, why isn't Boehner eager to repeat the action?  

     

  •  Ignore the man, close the curtain. (0+ / 0-)

    Do you want to be happy or right?

    The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries. -WiA "When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill..." - PhilJD

    by Words In Action on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 08:22:23 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site