The Fiscal Cliff

[Joel Goodson]

Corporate tax overhaul on the table: http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...258,full.story

Long overdue, IMO.

[DaytonIllini]

Few seem to understand the 2012 tax implications, thinking that we can go over the cliff and fix it later. And it would fix the 2013 problems, but not this AMT fiasco.

A CBS report indicated that people with incomes of $45,000 filing as individuals may pay as much as $4,000 more in taxes than last year. And H&R Block /quotes/zigman/219890/quotes/nls/hrb HRB -1.22% warns its clients that if they had been anticipating a $1,500 refund to instead expect to pay an additional $1,500 — or more

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fis...sco-2012-12-27

I hope you guys saved your money. This AMT is going to hit a lot of home owners and people in high income tax states that make relatively little money. Coming up with $4K may be tough if you make $50K a year.

[illini80]

House to vote today on the "Grand Compromise". Nice to see the boys and girls working together to avoid making difficult decisions. By the way, imo we went over the real cliff a while ago. We are just choosing to deny the truth. Our descendants will pay the price for our selfishness.

msn.com

An interim deal that would raise some income taxes, block spending cuts, extend jobless benefits & prevent a spike in milk prices will go to the House on Tuesday.

[DaytonIllini]

If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.

Thomas Paine

[Leonardite]

Originally Posted by illini80

House to vote today on the "Grand Compromise". Nice to see the boys and girls working together to avoid making difficult decisions. By the way, imo we went over the real cliff a while ago. We are just choosing to deny the truth. Our descendants will pay the price for our selfishness.

msn.com

Won't matter. This deal is just delaying the inevitable of us going over.

[DaytonIllini]

Surely the House isn't foolish enough to vote no tonight? I mean I thought they could pass everything with no tax increases and leave town. That would have put it on the Dems. Once they chose not to do that though, they really have to vote for this deal. It's pretty good for America. It makes cuts permanent for 99+% of America. It fixes the AMT permanently. It indexes the Estate Tax to inflation, which is huge. It keeps CapGains and DivInt at reasonable rates (15 or 20% depending on your income level). It fixes the DocFix for a year (should have been done permanently but we are dealing with the not so bright in Congress). It buys time to find a solution on the spending cuts.

It's a win for everyone. But most of all it's a win for the Republicans. They walk away to fight another day and guess what. Obama had most of the clout on this. He has none as we move into the next phase. With taxes out of the way, he can do little except !!!!! and moan about spending cuts that he will be forced to make to raise the debt limit.

Don't be STUPID Republicans. Pass the bill.

[DaytonIllini]

Sanity prevails and yet about 150 of our representatives voted for the largest tax increase in American history. They voted to double milk prices, remove 300 billion from Medicare over 10 years. They voted to force the AMT on people making 45K. That money was due in 4 months.

Quick. Show of hands. How many people making $45K had a spare $2K sitting around? On top of the $900 more that you'll be paying in payroll taxes as a result of this deal.

The people that voted no need to be purged from all elective office. They need to be publicly humiliated and castigated. They should never be a townhome board much less be running our nation.

[bmb777]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

Quick. Show of hands. How many people making $45K had a spare $2K sitting around? On top of the $900 more that you'll be paying in payroll taxes as a result of this deal..

we would fall pretty much right in the middle of the middle class. we could've survived if we would have had to pay an extra 2,000 in taxes. we wouldnt have been happy about it, but couldve done it. Thank God we dont have to though.

I agree, those who voted against the bill should be voted out of office.

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

Surely the House isn't foolish enough to vote no tonight? I mean I thought they could pass everything with no tax increases and leave town. That would have put it on the Dems. Once they chose not to do that though, they really have to vote for this deal. It's pretty good for America. It makes cuts permanent for 99+% of America. It fixes the AMT permanently. It indexes the Estate Tax to inflation, which is huge. It keeps CapGains and DivInt at reasonable rates (15 or 20% depending on your income level). It fixes the DocFix for a year (should have been done permanently but we are dealing with the not so bright in Congress). It buys time to find a solution on the spending cuts.

It's a win for everyone. But most of all it's a win for the Republicans. They walk away to fight another day and guess what. Obama had most of the clout on this. He has none as we move into the next phase. With taxes out of the way, he can do little except !!!!! and moan about spending cuts that he will be forced to make to raise the debt limit.

Don't be STUPID Republicans. Pass the bill.

I'll bet you that tax increases are back on the table when we get to talking about spending cuts. And again, at that time, we will see little in terms of spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling.

All that being said, I agree with your general points.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by IntenselyOrange

I'll bet you that tax increases are back on the table when we get to talking about spending cuts. And again, at that time, we will see little in terms of spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling.

All that being said, I agree with your general points.

No doubt about it. But leverage is what we are talking about. Obama had it all with regard to taxes right now. Later the Republicans have 100% of the leverage. They can demand a lot, and they will. I fully expect a debt limit crisis in a month or two. I expect we will see a much larger demand from the Republicans than they would have because of O's hubris through this. We'll see. But the Republicans had to sign it or they would be the problem last night (even amongst their own party). Nobody will be getting a pass from Grover Norquist in a month to raise taxes, and it probably won't happen (except perhaps some phase outs of deductions in return for lower corporate rates or something like that).

[IntenselyOrange]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

No doubt about it. But leverage is what we are talking about. Obama had it all with regard to taxes right now. Later the Republicans have 100% of the leverage. They can demand a lot, and they will. I fully expect a debt limit crisis in a month or two. I expect we will see a much larger demand from the Republicans than they would have because of O's hubris through this. We'll see. But the Republicans had to sign it or they would be the problem last night (even amongst their own party). Nobody will be getting a pass from Grover Norquist in a month to raise taxes, and it probably won't happen (except perhaps some phase outs of deductions in return for lower corporate rates or something like that).

Obama still has the leverage. He's winning at class warfare. That is what this has been and what it will continue to be.

Leverage is based on who has the winning argument with the public. Raising taxes on the few always plays well. Reforming spending so that the many give something up always plays poorly. People simply do not have the vision to see how their decisions impact their own short term future and certainly have no ability to understand how these decision impact their children and grandchildren.

[hermie1985]

Originally Posted by IntenselyOrange

Obama still has the leverage. He's winning at class warfare. That is what this has been and what it will continue to be.

Leverage is based on who has the winning argument with the public. Raising taxes on the few always plays well. Reforming spending so that the many give something up always plays poorly. People simply do not have the vision to see how their decisions impact their own short term future and certainly have no ability to understand how these decision impact their children and grandchildren.

Exactly. Obama won a huge number of votes in the people making under $30,000 category. I believe that is where the election was won. Cutting entitlements won't help the Repubs in the future unless they can effectively sell those people as being long term better off under a republican plan. Tough to do

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by IntenselyOrange

Obama still has the leverage. He's winning at class warfare. That is what this has been and what it will continue to be.

Leverage is based on who has the winning argument with the public. Raising taxes on the few always plays well. Reforming spending so that the many give something up always plays poorly. People simply do not have the vision to see how their decisions impact their own short term future and certainly have no ability to understand how these decision impact their children and grandchildren.

You have to win with your constituents, not with your public. They need to pander to who will reelect them and it isn't going to be single women and african-americans no matter what you give them.

When it comes time to deal with the sequester and the debt ceiling I expect the roles to be reversed. Republicans don't really care about cuts to women with infant children living off the 'fat of the land'. They'll cut that in a heartbeat.

Originally Posted by hermie1985

Exactly. Obama won a huge number of votes in the people making under $30,000 category. I believe that is where the election was won. Cutting entitlements won't help the Repubs in the future unless they can effectively sell those people as being long term better off under a republican plan. Tough to do

The country was a much better place when these people were not allowed to vote. This country was set up to allow land owners to vote. Maybe we should go back to that. The poor and sub 30K is dirt-poor, are ALWAYS going to vote themselves more benefits. The Democrats will ALWAYS pander to these people.

[dsboyce]

I agree that it was better to pass this than to not pass it. On the other hand, I am very unhappy with a few aspects of this deal.

1. No spending cuts. I don't even need to explain that.

2. The 2% increase on the payroll tax. My wife and I just cancelled our DirecTv service to help ease some financial difficulties we were having. With the increase in the payroll tax, we will not even break even on this. We will still have less money even after getting rid of the tv.

3. The tax money going to NASCAR, Goldman Sacs, etc. the taxpayers funding corporate welfare has got to stop.

[gibb52]

Originally Posted by DaytonIllini

You have to win with your constituents, not with your public. They need to pander to who will reelect them and it isn't going to be single women and african-americans no matter what you give them.

When it comes time to deal with the sequester and the debt ceiling I expect the roles to be reversed. Republicans don't really care about cuts to women with infant children living off the 'fat of the land'. They'll cut that in a heartbeat.



The country was a much better place when these people were not allowed to vote. This country was set up to allow land owners to vote. Maybe we should go back to that. The poor and sub 30K is dirt-poor, are ALWAYS going to vote themselves more benefits. The Democrats will ALWAYS pander to these people.

Representation without taxation. Wonder what Ben, George and Thomas would think about that.

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by gibb52

Representation without taxation. Wonder what Ben, George and Thomas would think about that.

Well they wrote the system we have so I think they'd be quite pleased. What they probably wouldn't be pleased with is a nanny state, a permanent army, endless war, redistribution of wealth. You know that stuff.

[Holdemall]

The country was a much better place when these people were not allowed to vote. This country was set up to allow land owners to vote. Maybe we should go back to that. The poor and sub 30K is dirt-poor, are ALWAYS going to vote themselves more benefits. The Democrats will ALWAYS pander to these people.

Of course! Why would we want women, minorities, and Catholics to vote?

[DaytonIllini]

Originally Posted by Holdemall

Of course! Why would we want women, minorities, and Catholics to vote?

There was supposed to be a :rolleyes: after 'Maybe we should go back to that.' The point being that Republicans should not try and win these people over. They get to vote like everyone else and they are going to vote for Democrats no matter what.

[bmb777]

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

Senator Barack Obama in a floor speech in the Senate in March 2006