Skip to main content

Thanks to Republican unwillingness to compromise on deficit reduction legislation, the looming budget sequester has basically turned into a blame game. And according to a new poll from USA Today and Pew, they are losing:

Chart showing most Americans would blame Republicans for sequester cuts
(Courtesy of Steve Benen)
The poll showed that while most Americans want to see deficit reduction legislation enacted this year, they do not want to move forward with the sequester, even if the deficit reduction legislation is not enacted. 49 percent said that they would support delaying the sequester in the absence of a deficit reduction deal. 40 percent said they wanted to move forward with the sequester.

Nonetheless, according to the poll, there is widespread support for deficit reduction legislation:

Seven of 10 Americans (including not only 81% of Republicans but also 65% of Democrats) say it is essential for the president and Congress to enact major deficit legislation this year.
And:
When asked which of four issues was most pressing — the deficit, guns, immigration or climate change — 51% chose the deficit, three times that of any other issue. However, there were some significant differences by race and ethnicity. Hispanics were inclined to choose immigration as the most critical issue; African Americans chose guns.
So there's broad support for deficit reduction legislation, but at the same time voters don't want to move forward with the sequester, even if deficit reduction legislation isn't passed. Yet by all appearances, they aren't going to get what they want, because there won't be deficit reduction legislation by March 1—and we will move forward with the sequester.

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

  •  And so we see how Media creates false issues. (35+ / 0-)

    If reporting on the deepening immiseration of the people, the lack of Jobs and how desperately they are needed, with the attendant "only the government can stimulate Job growth" had matched in frequency and intensity, there'd be whole other poll results.

    Notice, "Jobs" was left completely off the table.

    There's lies, damned lies, statistics, and polls.


    We live in a nation where doctors destroy health; lawyers, justice; universities, knowledge; governments, freedom; the press, information; religion, morals; and our banks destroy the economy. -- Chris Hedges

    by Jim P on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:36:32 AM PST

    •  Jim, that's the only way they could get (16+ / 0-)

      a pro-austerity response.

      The public doesn't want to cut social security, medicare, or education. The public wants the government to create jobs and fix the economy (and doesn't much care how the gov't does that). Those are anti-austerity positions. But if you don't ask about those things, you can paint the American public as pro-austerity. Not that it matters. DC just ignores the polls they don't like.

      if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:50:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You nailed it. The fact of the matter is, most (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Jim P, quill

        folks don't have a clue what "austerity" means, much less that all the talk about "deficit reduction" is (to some extent) doublespeak for starting the process of dismantling Social Security and Medicare.

        Here's an excerpt from the Tuesday, February 19th Press Briefing, with Press Secretary Jay Carney.
        Mr. Carney:  So the President believes, . . . that we need to do this in a balanced way, that that’s the responsible way to reduce our deficit, to reach that goal of at least $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years that stabilizes our fiscal situation, . . .

        And that’s why the President, in every effort with the Speaker of the House and in his budgets and in his submission to the super committee, has put forward a balanced deficit reduction plan that includes more spending cuts than revenues, but insists that we do this in a way that’s fair to senior citizens and middle-class families and others so that we don’t ask those groups of Americans to bear the burden solely of deficit reduction . . .

        And, here's the bottom line:  

        Q    Does the President support the specifics of this updated Simpson-Bowles plan?

        MR. CARNEY:  The President has his own plan, and it has been very clear again, going back to the submission to the super committee, the submission of the President’s budget, the proposals and counteroffers that the President made in his negotiations with the Speaker of the House late last year, the leftover portions of which remain on the table and are available for action today, including the very tough choices the President was willing to make when it came to further spending cuts and entitlement reform.  But there has to be balance.  It has to include the kind of tax reform that produces revenue that Speaker Boehner himself embraced just a few months ago but suddenly now has decided is bad policy or unnecessary -- that they would rather seniors foot the bill, or middle-class families trying to send their kids to college, or in the case of the impact of the sequester, see first responders lose their jobs.  That's just bad policy, and the President doesn't support it.

        By all means, don't read only my highlighted key points (for "balance.")  :-)

        So, in spite of all the "verbal gymnastics" coming from all sides, austerity measures are still very much on the table.

        Let's not forget folks, that the very definition of austerity is the raising of taxes (doesn't matter that it's via "loophole closings"), and the cutting of services, especially social services.
        That's exactly what's happened in Greece, Great Britain, Spain, etc.

        Please, read the excellent Press Briefing transcripts that are provided here daily, by the Transcript Editors.  BTW, thank you DKos!

        The MSM "talking points" rarely ever scratch the surface, when it comes to policies.

        These Press Briefing transcripts do just that, though.

        [And yes, as joey c pointed out--I have found the bold and italic keys!  :-D]

        Mollie

        "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible." --Frank L. Gaines

        "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

        by musiccitymollie on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:47:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  DC ignores a million people on the streets (4+ / 0-)

        if they don't like what they're saying.

        We need a new monkey wrench.


        We live in a nation where doctors destroy health; lawyers, justice; universities, knowledge; governments, freedom; the press, information; religion, morals; and our banks destroy the economy. -- Chris Hedges

        by Jim P on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:58:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  The Media is pushing the billionaires' agenda (12+ / 0-)

      to convince us that cutting Social Security and Medicare is for our own good. It's reform. It's necessary to save it.

      We can see from this manipulative poll exactly what they are up to. And Jed plays along with it. He show that Obama and Dems are winning the game.  Jed doesn't tell us that the prize we win is jobs losses and Social Security cuts.

      look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

      by FishOutofWater on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:54:08 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm so sick of this whole SS thing to begin with. (5+ / 0-)

        The GOP hates it - always have - unless it's time for them to collect.  We should be increasing what seniors live on.  My Mom gets somewhere between $1000 and $1200 a month.  That's just criminal.  I work for a lawyer who has an elderly client who gets SS and has to supplement it with food stamps.  We should be ashamed of ourselves, and should stop giving the GOP a platform on this subject, period.  They're an inhumane hateful disgraceful bunch, and if they can't offer any input as to how to make people's lives better, and not just billionaires, they shouldn't be allowed an input.

        "They love the founding fathers so much they will destroy everything they created and remake it in Rush Limbaughs image." MinistryofTruth, 9/29/11

        by AnnieR on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:08:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yes (8+ / 0-)

      Poll wording is making deficits the default "economy" option. If you ask most people, without giving them a list of options, what the most pressing issue is, they'd say "the economy," or even simply "jobs," not the fricking deficit. But the more the deficit is presented as the only economic issue, the more people conflate the current situation with deficits.

       There are way too many people now who think the financial crisis was caused by too much government spending (well, that and Barney Frank and poor people buying more house than they can afford), and this constant emphasis on the deficit in polling and its dominance of economic talk just reinforces that attitude among the low-information masses.

      I suppose the surface reason for the poll setup is that these are issues that currently have some sort of momentum in Congress or legislation attached or negotiations going on and the pollsters are trying to see what the public thinks Congress and the president should focus on first, which, in itself, is pretty pathetic, considering the most pressing issue isn't really being worked on, except, to some extent, by the president and the Democrats, with their latest budget and infrastructure proposals -- which means it's invisible to the Village, since no Republican is flogging it to them.

    •  People do not understand this issue (11+ / 0-)

      and the media is 100% to blame for that.  Most people still wrongly equate the govt's finances with those of the average household.  They also wrongly think that we owe most of our debt to China, which only holds 8% of the total debt.  What most people do not understand is just how much of our govt debt is held by the people themselves, including over $3 trillion by Social Security alone.  If the media would frame the question in the form of people investing in treasury bills instead of the negative word "debt," we might see a very different answer.

      "Growing up is for those who don't have the guts not to. Grow wise, grow loving, grow compassionate, but why grow up?" - Fiddlegirl

      by gulfgal98 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:04:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You hit the nail on the head. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mr MadAsHell, Jim P, PorridgeGun

      When I read this line: "which of four issues was most pressing — the deficit, guns, immigration or climate change?" I knew we were already losing an argument by bad framing.

      Given those four choices, I might also say deficit, but I would put several other issues, including Jobs and Infrasctructure, ahead of all four choices.

      This is a bad sign -- the GOP is being successful in making the deficit into a scary monster.

      Why don't we commission our own poll -- "which of these four issues to you think is more important: (1)jobs, (2) repairing dangerous bridges, roads and schools; (3) improving education or (4) ending gridlock in D.C.?"

      Then we can put the results on the front page of USA today.

      "Don't bring that horse in here!" -- Cassandra

      by tc59 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:22:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd replace 4 with "Ending the Eternal War (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        musiccitymollie, tc59

        Around the World"

        "Gridlock" plays into the bi-partisanshit self-destruction we keep getting from Dems in DC.


        We live in a nation where doctors destroy health; lawyers, justice; universities, knowledge; governments, freedom; the press, information; religion, morals; and our banks destroy the economy. -- Chris Hedges

        by Jim P on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:04:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I was going to argue with this: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jim P, farmerhunt
      We live in a nation where doctors destroy health; lawyers, justice; universities, knowledge; governments, freedom; the press, information; religion, morals; and our banks destroy the economy. -- Chris Hedges
      I'm a doctor.  I was going to argue with the 'doctors destroy health' part, until I read the other six parts.  Since the last six out of seven of those observations seem so correct and on point, maybe I'd better take the first one seriously and do some introspection.
      Still, I'd rather pass the buck, and change it to "health insurance companies destroy health," or perhaps "our health care 'system' destroys health".

      We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

      by david78209 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:50:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  From the perspective that the US (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        david78209

        has between 30,000 to 250,000 iatrogenic deaths each year, depending on who is doing the counting. Certainly the worst rate in the West, maybe the whole world.

        Most of these are related to hospitals and pharmaceuticals, but we have a miserable health care system. Moreover, I've had doctors who were really wonderful and decent human beings, but they insisted, in accord with their training, that any number of things such as nutrition don't matter.


        We live in a nation where doctors destroy health; lawyers, justice; universities, knowledge; governments, freedom; the press, information; religion, morals; and our banks destroy the economy. -- Chris Hedges

        by Jim P on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:27:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Be sure to catch Jon Stewart's interview with (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        david78209

        Steven Brill on last night's show.  

        http://www.thedailyshow.com/

        Brill wrote a long expose' for Time Magazine of the real money trail in the health care industry that Jon, who was beside himself with accolades, predicted that this would be a "Silent Spring Moment" for U. S. health care. The truth will sicken you.

  •  A carbon tax would reduce the deficit (7+ / 0-)

    and address climate change but Americans are serious about talking about the deficit, not doing something about it.

    look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

    by FishOutofWater on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:36:47 AM PST

    •  I genuinely don't beleive that the vast (11+ / 0-)

      majority of Americans understand what the deficit is.  They know that it is bad and should be dealt with. Period.  When you give people an inkling as to what DC is considering sacrificing in the name of "deficit reduction" then they get upset.

      And, Jim P beat me to it re: jobs.  If asked to choose between importance of "deficit" and "climate" (not even giving them a choice on job creation), they'll choose deficit because they've been trained by the media to believe "deficit bad."  Climate change? Not so much on the radar for a majority of Americans.

      •  more the problem i think, is that (6+ / 0-)

        the majority of Americans don't understand this:

        "Believe it or not, the federal deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than it has in any such stretch since demobilization from World War II."
        perhaps b'cuz WH press corps all wee-wee'd up over personal affronteries... such as golf/tiger presidential snub

        missing Uncle Walter? i know i am

        "Show up. Pay attention. Tell the truth. And don't be attached to the results." -- Angeles Arrien

        by Sybil Liberty on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:01:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Respectfully, Aquarius40 . . . (0+ / 0-)

        You say:  " When you give people an inkling as to what DC is considering sacrificing in the name of "deficit reduction" then they get upset."

        As well they should!

        This shouldn't be a zero-sum game.

        And, anyway, there's no reason to cut Social Security.  The program's in full balance for many years to come.  (May need a tweak or two, but nothing like the Bowles-Simpson Fiscal Commission recommends.)

        The American People need to insist that the PtB stop empire building.

        That's the "rat hole" that's swallowing up our hard-earned tax dollars!

        Mollie

        "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible." --Frank L. Gaines

        "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

        by musiccitymollie on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 10:04:45 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  No, it would tank the economy (0+ / 0-)

      There would be even more unemployed and more businesses would move out of the country - both resulting in lower revenues.

  •  This is a win for the Republicans (10+ / 0-)

    Simply the fact that we are all talking about the deficit, and not about the economy and maintaining progress on recovering from the Bush Recession, is a win for Republicans.

    We know these things:

    --  Cutting government is the best way to tank the economy all over again, lose jobs, and screw us all over again.

    --  The deficit itself was created by, and is maintained by, Republican policies much more than it is by the spending needed to dig out of the general economic cesspool the Republicans made.

    Therefore:  Everything that everyone, even progressives on this site and others, says about the deficit, is upside down and backwards.

    Which is just what the Republicans want.  They say things that are not true, as if they were self-evident.

    And Democrats just sit there, silent, because they are too stupid and cowardly to challenge them with such a weak weapon as truth, or to understand what the truth is.

    In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

    by Noziglia on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:41:05 AM PST

  •  Just say NO Boehner.....and point your finger over (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shoeless

    .....there.

  •  This won't stop until GOP is punished politically (6+ / 0-)

    The GOP has to pay a huge political price for their bull$hit games on the sequester, the debt ceiling, etc., etc., and until they do have to pay that price, they won't stop pandering to the teahadists and the Ayn Rand worshippers.

    Please help to fight hunger with a donation to Feeding America.

    by MJB on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:43:03 AM PST

  •  I wonder about this blame business. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shoeless, geez53, PsychoSavannah

    Given the 2010 redistricting, a significant number of batshit crazy Republican in the House are in batshit crazy Republican districts.  I can't imagine that they're going to change.  So it seems to me that if anything is going to change re the sequester, it's going to come from peeling off the slightly less batshit crazy ones to do something with Dem support.

    Oh, and jobs?

  •  up next: the Social Security Cuts Blame Game! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishOutofWater, musiccitymollie

    if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:47:40 AM PST

    •  I will blame the party that passes and signs (5+ / 0-)

      the bill.

      Since we all were told a million times that nothing passes the Senate without more than 60 votes don't expect me to blame Republicans for letting a bill pass that cuts Social Security or Medicare.

      •  Damned skippy. n/t (0+ / 0-)

        if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:58:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  And most folks will. Generally speaking, at least (0+ / 0-)

        some of the American public knows that it was President Reagan who signed the last major Social Security overhaul (as a result of the Greenspan Commission, etc).

        I know almost no one, who could tell you who the Party leaders were during this time, much less any more detail about "who" was responsible for this "reform."

        With legislation of this nature, and this major, it's always the President who gets the credit, or the blame.  

        (This would have been true if "W" had succeeded in Social Security reform, while he was President.)

        Mollie

        "Only he who can see the invisible, can do the impossible." --Frank L. Gaines

        "If a dog won’t come to you after having looked you in the face, you should go home and examine your conscience.” -- Woodrow Wilson

        by musiccitymollie on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:01:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  A lot of things would reduce the deficit and be (8+ / 0-)

    finacially beneficial to the vast majority of the country at the same time. But the lame asses that pose as journalists wouldn't know how to pose proper questions to get accurate answers if their lives depended on it. Closing all the damn corporate loopholes, raise the estate tax, raise the damn capital gains tax and how about we invest in keeping our freaking infrastructure doesn't crumble any more than it already has? Almost instantly create millions of jobs, people have jobs, they spend money, people spend money, businesses make money, businessess make more money, they open more businesses....Jesus christ on a cross it's not rocket science!!!

    "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..

    by mindara on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:48:13 AM PST

    •  The singlest greatest thing to reduce the debt (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DSPS owl, boofdah, Val

      is simple...JOBS!  People having good paying jobs pay a hell of a lot more in taxes than those who are unemployed or under employed.  Couple that with getting us out of these treasury draining wars and much of the debt issue becomes moot.

      "Growing up is for those who don't have the guts not to. Grow wise, grow loving, grow compassionate, but why grow up?" - Fiddlegirl

      by gulfgal98 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:07:57 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Economic Recovery is a condition precedent (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DSPS owl, mindara, Val

      to meaningful deficit reduction.

      Create more taxpayers, demand for goods and new technologies/industries, and the debt will be paid 100X faster than any austerity program.

      •  It's basic elementary school intro to economics... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Val

        It really is that simple. The only problem is that the robber baron's and their lackey's only get to be rich, they don't get to be insanely, obscenely, outrageously rich.

        "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity" Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr..

        by mindara on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 11:46:06 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  guess they're winning the war on (7+ / 0-)

    the deficit conversation--though I bet jobs/economy would still trump deficit as a concern, as it has in every poll since 2008.

    if necessary for years; if necessary, alone

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:48:46 AM PST

  •  I think Republicans will fold (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999

    If the stock market continues going down, some rich guy will pick up the phone and Republicans will fold like a house of cards.

    Obama 2012...going to win it with our support!!!

    by mattinjersey on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:52:24 AM PST

    •  No way. The teabaggers have Boehner (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mattinjersey, Just Bob

      by his short hairs.....he gave them power.  They aren't letting that go.  Shutting down the government is their reason for BEING.  He didn't shut them down early and often....and they are uncontrollable now.  And despite their big-money seed money, the whackjobs now in office are true believers.

      David Koch is Longshanks, and Occupy is the real Braveheart.

      by PsychoSavannah on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:09:26 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  "unwillingness to compromise", Jed??? WTF? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Whatithink

    The sequestration IS a compromise.  It is an 18 month old compromise that President Obama and the Dems AND the Repubs are now trying to renege on.

    President Obama got his debt limit increase.  He also got his revenue increase not two months ago.  But now there has to be another compromise before he honors his previous compromise?  Nice!

    •  Wrong - It's a Penalty for Not Compromising (7+ / 0-)

      The sequestration was set up as a trigger to FORCE the parties to a compromise by the deadline. Failure to compromise would trigger the sequestration and all it's attendant misery.

      Theoretically, that was supposed to get conservatives to give a little on revenues, but apparently they've decided that using a hatchet is better than a scalpel.

      You seem to think that only Obama got anything out of that deal. Boehner said he got 98% of what he wanted and Ryan took credit for the idea.

      •  They already did "give a little on revenues" (0+ / 0-)

        You forget Obama got revenue increases 8 weeks ago with NO CUTS?

        Listen.. I'm all for closing loopholes and getting rid of most subsidies.  But Obama and the Senate Dems have refused to negotiate real tax reform.  They have let this slide until it becomes a crisis.  Now we all have to live through the drama of the President trotting out first responders who are not even paid by the feds and listen to him cry about the looming crisis.. and he still has the chutzpah to ask for a new $50 Billion dollar stimulus program on the same day!

        •  OK...I'll bite...what tax reform do you think is (0+ / 0-)

          appropriate?

          Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

          by Just Bob on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:26:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  First off.. simplification (0+ / 0-)

            A small number of brackets.. The lowest paying nothing.

            No deductions.

            Income is income whether it is from capital gains or a salary.

            Some spreadsheet geniuses in D.C can do the math so that the brackets are set up so we are not, at least, getting any less revenue... and hopefully some more than currently.

            •  In other words you would like to see (0+ / 0-)

              a more regressive system with the rich paying less taxes?

              Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

              by Just Bob on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 06:09:15 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  No. Who said that? (0+ / 0-)

                I said - keep revenues at least at the current level.

                The poor pay NO TAXES.

                The rich will pay slightly lower rates but have NO DEDUCTIONS.  Cap gains get taxed at regular rates.

                How the fuck more plain can that be?

                •  "A small number of brackets..." (0+ / 0-)

                  That is regressive. It shifts the tax burden to the middle class. One has only to consider the various flat tax schemes to see the effect. The wealthy pay less. The middle class pays more. It's just another way of saying "broaden the tax base."

                  Now then, do you think obscenities strengthen your argument?

                  Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

                  by Just Bob on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:08:12 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Ok.. so, lemme 'splain this slowly (0+ / 0-)

                    Let's say we have 4-5 brackets..

                    Under $30k  = 0%  <- Pays NO TAXES
                    $30k-40k    = 6%
                    $40k-65k    = 9%
                    $65k-120k   = 12%
                    $120k-750k  = 14%
                    $750k and up= 23%

                    A person making $1 million dollars pays $230,000 in taxes.  Dividends and Cap Gains all taxed as income.  

                    A person making $100k pays $12,000.  Just about what it is today..

                    And those are numbers I simply pulled out of my ass.. Like I said.. Accountants could come up with percentages to make sure we are getting at least as much revenue as we currently do and spread out as we do now - i.e. wealthy earners paying about 70% of all income taxes.

                    This is progressive.  If you still disagree, then your definition of the term "regressive" is that is doesn't "punish" the rich enough.  It amazes me how much deep seated hatred so-called "progressives" hold for the wealthy.  (Or, is it jealousy?)

                    •  Let's stick to reality (0+ / 0-)

                      Marginal tax rates for 2013 can be found in a table here:

                      There are currently seven tax brackets. What you have simply pulled out of your ass would save your taxpayer with a $1,000,000 taxable income $166,000. To achieve revenue neutrality someone else would have to make up the difference.

                      I'll disregard the insults and right wing talking points. They're no match for facts.

                      Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

                      by Just Bob on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 10:57:44 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  As for your $100,000 taxpayer... (0+ / 0-)

                      He will pay $28,000 in 2013 as opposed to your $12,000.

                      Perhaps you should give this more thought.

                      Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

                      by Just Bob on Fri Feb 22, 2013 at 11:01:18 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No. You are wrong. (0+ / 0-)

                        He doesn't pay anywhere near that in income taxes.

                        You know nothing about taxes, yet you argue like you are some expert.

                        And you don't even read the links you post..  That link gives your exact example.

                        For example, if you single, you earn $100,000 per year, you would not owe 28% on all of your income — you would not owe $28,000 to the federal government. You would owe 10% of $8,925, 15% of $27,325 (the difference between the top and the threshold of the second tax bracket), 25% of $51,600, and 28% of $12,150 (the difference between your income and the threshold of the third tax bracket).

                        That calculation results in $21,293, or an effective (not marginal) tax rate of 21.2%. That will be further reduced by any credits, assuming your taxable income is the same as your gross income. Your effective tax rate could be much lower if deductions have already reduced your taxable income to $100,000 from a larger gross income. For example, if a 401(k) contribution reduced your taxable income from $115,000 to $100,000, you would still use the same tax calculation I’ve described here, but your effective tax rate would be 18.5%.

                        As mentioned, that is without any credits or deductions.  Most people in that bracket have a home, a mortgage, kids.. there are standard deductions and itemized deductions.

                        Most people in the middle quintile pay an effective tax rate of around 11%.

                        My tax plan with no deductions or credits, as I have mentioned over and over, is exactly the same as "effective tax rates".
                        ............
                        The rich person would pay more, not less.  Take Mitt Romney for instance.  He paid 14% because all his income was from dividends or cap gains (taxed at 15%) then he got deductions.  In my plan he would pay 23%.  Period.  His tax bill on $20 Million just went up from $2.6 Million to $4.6 Million.

          •  Oh.. and.. (0+ / 0-)

            that "no deductions" part includes no special corporate credits and subsidies.

            However, business taxes will still get "deductions" for their expenses.

      •  If Obama wasn't going to get anything (0+ / 0-)

        out of the deal, why did he sign it? This political chicken is futile, ends up confusing your base, and hurts people in the end. For what...a political point? I thought PBO was smarter than that, or at least more caring. He has to redeem himself in my eyes. Sorry but that is how I feel. I cannot in clean conscience blame this all on the republicans.

  •  A Workable Idea? (0+ / 0-)

    I know that this has a snowflake's chance in Hell of ever happening, but I believe that it is an option.

    This whole business with the sequester and President Obama proves one thing -- at least to me.  The thing that REALLY matters to the Republicans is having power and wielding it.  Fox News and NBC have given them the feeling that they are invincible, and that, by God, it is going to be their way or the highway.

    In view of this, plus the harm that the sequester will bring to this country, they will prove that their love of wielding power surpasses their love of country that they are so fond of braying about.

    That being the case, I would recommend that recall efforts be launched, especially against John Boehner and Eric Cantor, plus any other Republican that insists on holding the country hostage.

    I know that this will never work, because their districts passed up a chance to dump them last November.  I also know that it will never work because a recall effort requires an electorate that has a bunch of functioning brains and who do not get their news strictly from Fox and NBC.

    But times are desperate, and desperate situation require desperate solutions.  Like I said earlier, I know the recall idea will never work, given the electorates involved.  But then we will never know this for sure until we try.

    •  Federal legislators can't be recalled. (0+ / 0-)

      ExcePt by losing their next regularly-scheduled election.

      Same thing with Federal term limits... Requirs amending the Constiution.

      --Shannon

      "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
      "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

      by Leftie Gunner on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 12:15:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  "When asked which of four issues was most" (8+ / 0-)
    pressing — the deficit, guns, immigration or climate change — 51% chose the deficit, three times that of any other issue.--the deficit, guns, immigration or climate change — 51% chose the deficit, three times that of any other issue.
    Just goes to show you what a well crafted and adequately funded disinformation campaign can achieve.

    Acceleration is a thrill, but velocity gets you there

    by CarolinNJ on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 07:57:21 AM PST

    •  Shoulda included warm cuddly puppies. (0+ / 0-)
    •  Which would you choose? Guns? Scary guns? (0+ / 0-)

      Immigration?

      Yeah, those are both CRISES..

      Climate change??  Our carbon output is the lowest in 20 years from power generation.  But wait..Americans aren't hurting enough.. let's stick it to 'em a little harder and deeper, eh?

      •  By me, the deficit is a non issue. As in, with (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Just Bob, musiccitymollie

        the correct policy implementations, will fix itself.  And in any event, was much higher in WWII and nobody even blinked.  It's another straw man exploitation, a way forward to privilege and squalor police state nationhood.

        Acceleration is a thrill, but velocity gets you there

        by CarolinNJ on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:14:02 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  But the co2 in the atmosphere is still increasing (0+ / 0-)

        Others have simply gotten old. I prefer to think I've been tempered by time.

        by Just Bob on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 01:29:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  True.. (0+ / 0-)

          But why is it only the responsibility of the United States?

          We surely need to do better on how much we spew into the atmosphere.  But why do all the emerging industrial nations like China and India get a pass?

          There is no sense in going into crisis management mode and ruining our economy when China and India are increasing their CO2 output by nearly 10% per year.  

          China's carbon emissions grew 9.9 percent in 2011 after rising 10.4 percent in 2010 and now comprise 28 percent of all CO2 pollution compared with 16 percent for the United States.

          India's emissions grew 7.5 percent last year versus 9.4 percent growth in 2010, while emissions in the United States and the European Union fell 1.8 percent and 2.8 respectively in 2011.

          What the US can do without hurting the economy is to first convert as many coal plants to natural gas.  Natural gas releases half the CO2 coal does.  At the same time pursue new wind and solar projects.  I would add new nuclear, too.  But that is not a very popular idea around here.

          We can do all those things without much cost to the federal government, with incentives like we are currently doing.. simply accelerate those.  And, bring down the regulatory barriers preventing those things from happening fast.

    •  "well crafted and adequately funded disinformation (0+ / 0-)

      campaign", the other edge of the Information Age sword.

  •  The economy -- the missing choice (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    geez53, bdop4, PsychoSavannah, PhilJD, boofdah, Val
    When asked which of four issues was most pressing — the deficit, guns, immigration or climate change — 51% chose the deficit, three times that of any other issue. However, there were some significant differences by race and ethnicity. Hispanics were inclined to choose immigration as the most critical issue; African Americans chose guns.
    The deficit is largely a result of the lousy economy.  Fix the economy and the deficit would be easy to solve.  "The economy" should have been one of the choices in that poll.

    We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

    by david78209 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:03:12 AM PST

  •  Would there be such support for deficit (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Val

    reduction if the republicans hadn't been bashing us over the head with deficit reduction since Obama became President?  I'm sick of the rightwing noise machine being the example we all follow - I'm sick of the rightwing period.

    "They love the founding fathers so much they will destroy everything they created and remake it in Rush Limbaughs image." MinistryofTruth, 9/29/11

    by AnnieR on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:04:57 AM PST

  •  Party of Stupid (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PsychoSavannah

    is the major road block to US recovery.

  •  who are these people that care (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PsychoSavannah, PorridgeGun

    so much about the deficit? They don't really care about the deficit. They just say that to a pollster because it makes them think they're "serious."

    If you ask them about cutting specific programs, you'd get a very different result.

  •  What to do (0+ / 0-)

    Once this goes through, and life as we know it changes long lines at the airport, food market, doctors office how will we survive.  I am scared.  I am unemployed for almost a year, with no unemployment available, my life savings are being used up quickly.  Are we helpless???  I have lit more candles at church this week than I have all last year.  Mr Reid and Ms Pelosi need to put their feetdown and tell Mr Boner to grow up and work for the people of the country not just the 1%.  

  •  'Cons you can ride this horse.... (0+ / 0-)

    straight to oblivion hell.

    I think the sequester should become effective.

    I would love to see the GOP shriveling up and die.

    Psst!!!......Mittens you are more of a poor loser than I thought.

    by wbishop3 on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:13:56 AM PST

  •  It's Pretty Simple (0+ / 0-)

    Boehner has the Constitutional power to prevent the sequester so it's up to him.  If it comes to pass, we have no one to blame but him.

    Anthony Alexiou, Publisher, I Need Politics - www.NeedPolitics.com / @INeedPolitics

    by INeedPolitics on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:43:15 AM PST

  •  20% pay cuts for federal employees. (0+ / 0-)

    That's what the estimate is in terms of the furloughs that will result.

    Be interesting to see the breakdown of how much money that takes out of the economy once federal employees are spending 20% less.

    Cake or DEATH? Oh, I'll have cake, please.

    by wmtriallawyer on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 08:54:07 AM PST

  •  As with other comments above, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PorridgeGun

    the take away here is the complete failure of message on the part of progressives: essentially, nobody gives a rats butt about what Krugman has been saying - or Keynes for that matter.

    You cannot cut your way out of a recession.  You just can't.  The deficit is a long-term issue, not an immediate one: we need to get the economy back on track first (which in itself is a deficit reduction measure), and then tackle the longer term issues.

    This poll is depressing on so many different levels.

    The most violent element in society is ignorance.

    by Mr MadAsHell on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:22:56 AM PST

  •  Deficit obsession is GOP's best friend (0+ / 0-)

    It will not matter who gets the blame for sequestration. If the economy tanks, it will hurt Democrats in 2014. The problem is that anything done to reduce deficits will hurt the economy. Deficits need to be larger, and they don't need to be addressed this year,or next, or at all.

    It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Fish in Illinois on Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 09:50:40 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site