Bipartisan Hosing of the American People

The “fiscal cliff” deal will raise taxes for 77% of the American public.

It will add $4 trillion dollars to the deficit over the next 10 years.

It will create a drag on the economy equal to 1% of the grodd domestic product.

It creates uncertainty in the following areas:

A) the debt limit, B) the sequestered amounts, C) cuts in entitlement spending, D) additional taxes and don’t forget E) the President needs another Continuing Resolution (CR) to keep the lights on.

Blackrock’s Larry Fink is correct when he says:

The American People are the Big Losers In The Cliff Deal.

Fortunately, though, the deal gives Puerto Rican rum makers a tax subsidy.  History repeats …

The entire “fiscal cliff” is a ruse to fleece the peopleOnce again, the government has pimped us out.

Category: Think Tank

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

4 Responses to “The American People are the Big Losers In The Cliff Deal”

  1. znmeb says:

    Yes … this was the BOHICA Act of 2012.

  2. denim says:

    Raised taxes? Maybe more accurately, it restored the Reagan – O’Neill Social Security fix of the 1980′s that stealth Republican Obama so cavalierly torpedoed with his “payroll tax holiday”.

    “Before the confetti from Ronald Reagan’s 100th birthday is entirely swept away, we might pause to remember one of his signature achievements — back when Democrats and Republicans actually spoke to each other.

    It was in some ways a less entertaining time, but some things actually got done.
    One of them, in 1982, was a bipartisan overhaul of the finances of Social Security. A commission headed by Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., and Alan Greenspan, later the Oracle of the Federal Reserve, reduced some benefits and considerably increased Social Security taxes. Reagan and Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill signed off on the deal.

    As a result, for 30 years, Social Security piled up considerable surpluses — surpluses that were supposed to be there for the system when the Baby Boomers started to retire and begin decades of looking for their old Beatles records. Since by law Social Security can invest its surplus only in Treasury notes, it now holds $2.6 trillion in U.S. bonds — leaving it in position to make full payments until 2037.”
    http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/david_sarasohn/index.ssf/2011/02/time_to_live_up_to_reagans_soc.html

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2009/04/02/bipartisan-reagan-oneill-social-security-deal-in-1983-showed-it-can-be-done

  3. number2son says:

    Good comments, denim. And yeah, since when is restoring taxes to where they were before Bush started his credit card shopping spree called a tax “hike”? I never thought I’d be looking back to the 80′s era for an example of responsible government, but compared to what we’ve had for the last 13 years, I have no choice.

  4. rd says:

    The deal wasn’t great but it did do a couplefo good things.

    1. It made the AMT a rational thing (still unnecessary but now rational) so that the budget bean counters can’t falsify the books by assuming it will collect more tax than it will over the next decade. The lack of built in inflation adjustment has been a very fiscally destabilizing problem since it falsely and grossly over-estimated future tax collection.

    2. It began to close the gap between income from work versus passive investment. Similarly, it helps to control the concentration of wealth from generation to generation by leaving the estate tax in place for high wealth families. It won’t eliminate the massive income and wealth inequality that has been generated over the past couple of decades but hopefully it will prevent further growth and maybe bring it back to a healthier level.

    The deal is definitiely imperfect, but it does appear to make the tax code more rational and healthier than it has been since 2001.

    BTW – a big test of the Obama Administration going to be the fight over Social Security and Medicare. Allowing the temproary payroll tax holdiay to expire replaces that funding mechanism for Social Security. Since Social Security and Medicare are supposed to be paid for through payroll taxes (that the wealthy don’t pay much of), Obama should be able to keep it out of the overall budget discussions. the focus should be on the rest of the budget. The big issue for these big budget items is overall cost control in Medicare (which actually appears to be controlling costs better than private sector insurance) and having a healthy US economy that will be able to buy back the Treasury bonds held as IOUs by Social Security. It has baffled me why the Democrats have allowed Social Security to get wrapped up into a discussion of income tax makers and takers.