Oh my: GOP pulls out of Biden’s debt-ceiling talks

posted at 1:50 pm on June 23, 2011 by Allahpundit

Cantor was the sole Republican participant from the House and he quit this morning. Kyl, the only GOP senator involved, followed a little later.

Note to self: Buy gold.

Mr. Cantor, in an interview after a negotiating session he described as bitterly contentious, said he would not be attending Thursday’s scheduled meeting of the bipartisan deficit-reduction leadership group because he believed it was time for the negotiations to move to a higher level.

“We’ve reached the point where the dynamic needs to change,” Mr. Cantor said. “It is up to the president to come in and talk to the speaker. We’ve reached the end of this phase. Now is the time for these talks to go into abeyance.”

Still, Mr. Cantor remained optimistic about the prospects for a deal. He said the Biden group had already made significant progress and had tentatively identified more than $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years. But he said there could be no agreement on an overall package without breaking the impasse between Republicans’ refusal to accept any tax increase, and Democrats insistence that some tax increases be part of the deal

Mr. Cantor’s move marks a major turning point in the negotiations, which are trying to craft a major deficit-reduction initiative to clear the way for a needed increase in the federal debt limit before Aug. 2. Most participants had expected the negotiations would be passed off to Mr. Obama and higher level congressional leader, but Mr. Cantor’s move may force the shift sooner than many expected.

Who’s the real target of this move, Obama or Boehner? The Democratic spin is that Cantor and Kyl don’t want to commit political suicide with the base by placing themselves on the hook for approving tax hikes, so they’re punting the negotiations to the Speaker (and McConnell) under the pretense of “changing the dynamic” or whatever. Maybe that’s true of Cantor, but Kyl’s retiring so he has nothing to lose. And if it is true of Cantor, then Boehner’s a fool for appointing him to the Biden panel and not anticipating that he’d get squeamish and try to pass the buck once tax hikes ended up on the table. The real strategy here, I take it, is simply to force President Above-The-Fray into the mix, as he’ll be more reluctant than congressional Democrats to take a hard line on broad tax hikes knowing that it’ll make him the face of that position with the election looming. And even if he does, inevitably, endorse limited tax hikes — “tax the rich” always polls well, although plenty of wealthy donors will bristle — it’ll still help the GOP to have O’s fingerprints on a plan that would cut both discretionary and mandatory spending before the Dems’ Mediscare campaign gearing up.

Is there a downside, though, in going so far as to break off talks? Pew’s new poll shows independents almost evenly divided on which side to blame if there’s no debt deal. The fact that it’s the GOP that’s walking away and the GOP that’s refusing to make a key concession in the name of compromise — the Democrats, remember, have already tentatively agreed to something like $2 trillion in cuts over 10 years — makes things nice and easy for The One and liberal spin doctors if there’s no deal and the U.S. ends up defaulting. I doubt it’ll come to that (in fact, McConnell’s already floated the idea of a short-term increase in the debt ceiling to keep talks going if they can’t meet the August 2 deadline), but O can surely do damage on the stump as a personally popular politician hammering the idea that we’d have a grand-ish bargain if only those darned wingnuts would agree to raise taxes on rich people. Exit question via Red State: Isn’t $2 trillion in cuts over 10 years really not remotely equal to the task of making a dent in our debt problem? The debt ceiling was supposed to be the GOP’s big card in forcing major concessions on spending. What happened?

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

… and it keeps on ticking!

Shy Guy on June 23, 2011 at 1:53 PM

impasse between Republicans’ refusal to accept any tax increase, and Democrats insistence that some tax increases be part of the deal…

The Democrats are also demanding more spending.

Yeah. More spending plus tax increases will help spur the economy along and reduce debt.

O_o

Good Lt on June 23, 2011 at 1:53 PM

Exit question via Red State: Isn’t $2 trillion in cuts over 10 years really not remotely equal to the task of making a dent in our debt problem?

Given, depending on source and scoring, the 10-year deficit is between $6.85 trillion and $13 trillion, it’s barely a spit in the wind.

Steve Eggleston on June 23, 2011 at 1:54 PM

Note to self: Buy gold.

Well, it’s a bit late for it, but metals are down today, considerably.

Obama is MIA, except for destroying the land, in the name of saving his political azz.

Cornered snakes are very dangerous.

He’ll promise to give yer kids away by the time 2012, Nov., comes around.

Schadenfreude on June 23, 2011 at 1:54 PM

Count on the right to still betray you.

Schadenfreude on June 23, 2011 at 1:55 PM

BTW, that $2 trillion in spending “cuts” is really just a reduction in the scheduled increase.

Steve Eggleston on June 23, 2011 at 1:55 PM

He said the Biden group had already made significant progress and had tentatively identified more than $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years.

That is not significant enough. The number needs to be more like $8 trillion over the next 10 years.

Vashta.Nerada on June 23, 2011 at 1:55 PM

The debt ceiling was supposed to be the GOP’s big card in forcing major concessions on spending. What happened?

GOP “unexpectedly” has no spine?

See what I did there?

Midas on June 23, 2011 at 1:56 PM

What part of “There is no more money” don’t they understand?

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Biden’s Bunch are not the least bit serious on this one…unless raising taxes and continuing to spend like a drunken sailor member of Congress is their game plan. So, when the debt ceiling is reached and exceeded, Biden et al., can blame the GOP for not being “reasonable” and willing to compromise.

On this issue there can be no compromise.

The trillions of dollars Obama and Congress has spent or already committed is insane. Stop the profligate spending, make serious cuts in all government programs by 10% across the board immediately, then 5-10% annually for the next several years, get government out of the way, and we, the People, can take care of the rest pretty much by ourselves.

I much prefer the GOP walking away from these “talks” rather than cave in “for the children” or some other such rot.

coldwarrior on June 23, 2011 at 1:57 PM

The debt ceiling was supposed to be the GOP’s big card in forcing major concessions on spending. What happened?

Who says they’re not playing that card? Cantor walking away will force Obama to the table if he’s serious about not wanting the US to default on its debt. Obama can try to pin the blame on the GOP, but he’s the President so the buck ultimately stops with him.

Doughboy on June 23, 2011 at 1:57 PM

$2 trillion over 10 years is chicken feed compared to the annual deficit.

That could be made abundantly clear if the GOP had some balls.

teke184 on June 23, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Count on being scroomed by the right

Cantor has the credibility with the Tea Party that Boehner lacks. But that’s why Cantor won’t cut the deal. The Tea Party-types support him because he’s the guy who won’t cut the deal. He can’t sign off on tax increases without losing his power base. But if he’s able to throw it back to Boehner, and Boehner cuts the deal, that’s all good for Cantor:

Schadenfreude on June 23, 2011 at 1:57 PM

Note to self: Buy gold.

Gold is about $1500 / troy oz. Try real estate instead, especially with the bubble popping.

Cash purchases of real estate are spiking right now, which seems to say that people either see the bottom of the housing market OR that real estate is a more effective investment than securities or gold right now.

teke184 on June 23, 2011 at 1:59 PM

What part of “There is no more money” don’t they understand?

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 1:56 PM

I think Cantor and Kyl realized you can only bang your head against a brick wall for so long before you realize it hurts.

The fact that the Democrats are even talking any amount of new spending means there is no hope because they aren’t even on the same playing field.

gophergirl on June 23, 2011 at 1:59 PM

The debt ceiling was supposed to be the GOP’s big card in forcing major concessions on spending. What happened?

The right as dumb as ever!

Schadenfreude on June 23, 2011 at 2:00 PM

Most participants had expected the negotiations would be passed off to Mr. Obama and higher level congressional leader, but Mr. Cantor’s move may force the shift sooner than many expected.

Don’t look for Barry to willingly jump in. Mr Empty Suit doesn’t want to be held accountable for anything.

Just get ready for another “Presidential Address” on the issue that says absolutely nothing, other than “SQUAWK, TAX THE RICH, SQUAWK, TAX THE RICH”.

GarandFan on June 23, 2011 at 2:01 PM

What part of “There is no more money” don’t they understand?

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Have you ever experienced the reaction of a liberal after he’s been told “there is no more money?” They refuse to we’re broke. Reality and math elude them.

flyfisher on June 23, 2011 at 2:01 PM

The debt ceiling was supposed to be the GOP’s big card in forcing major concessions on spending. What happened?

If I told you AP, you would swing the ban hammer on me.

Knucklehead on June 23, 2011 at 2:02 PM

What part of “There is no more money” don’t they understand?

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 1:56 PM
Have you ever experienced the reaction of a liberal after he’s been told “there is no more money?” They refuse to BELIEVE we’re broke. Reality and math elude them.

flyfisher on June 23, 2011 at 2:01 PM

flyfisher on June 23, 2011 at 2:02 PM

Cash purchases of real estate are spiking right now, which seems to say that people either see the bottom of the housing market OR that real estate is a more effective investment than securities or gold right now.

teke184 on June 23, 2011 at 1:59 PM

It also likely means that they know the cash they have in hand is going to be worth significantly less in the near future than it is right now.

Midas on June 23, 2011 at 2:04 PM

What part of “There is no more money” don’t they understand?

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 1:56 PM

“no”?

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on June 23, 2011 at 2:05 PM

GOP pulls out of Biden’s debt-ceilingsealing talks

(Corrected obvious spelling error in headline)

landlines on June 23, 2011 at 2:07 PM

… and gold may be $1500/ounce, but that doesn’t mean it’s topping out, especially with the EU and dollar so very, very weak. Not as attractive as it was several hundred dollars per ounce ago, but there are people who didn’t buy gold at $1,000/ounce because it was already ‘up’ so much – I suspect they wish they had bought then.

At some point in the future, folks maybe look back and be very glad they bought some at $1500/ounce.

Haven’t quite decided myself yet.

Midas on June 23, 2011 at 2:07 PM

We are TIRED of this song and dance!

It’s dangerously foolish for us all!

golfmann on June 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM

… and gold may be $1500/ounce, but that doesn’t mean it’s topping out, especially with the EU and dollar so very, very weak.

It doesn’t mean it’s topping out, but the Return On Investment drops significantly past a certain point unless massive inflation happens and sends it from $1500 / ounce to $15,000 / ounce.

teke184 on June 23, 2011 at 2:09 PM

For those who think that the debt ceiling is the Republican’s trump card, you’re wrong. Obama will do anything for a political advantage because he is so self absorbed the concerns of you or I are meaningless to him. Come August he will order the Treasury Department to stop mailing Social Security checks. Republicans obviously fear getting the blame for such a move and will compromise at some point on the debt ceiling.

I think the best we can hope for at this point in time is no new spending and no new taxes. Any cuts are going to be minimal before the next congress and president are sworn in.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:10 PM

It’s go time

Hening on June 23, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Gold is money.

The Dollar is paper.

PatriotRider on June 23, 2011 at 2:11 PM

Raise taxes! That way we can have afford another stimulus to produce jobs.

Rovin on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

The trillions of dollars Obama and Congress has spent or already committed is insane. Stop the profligate spending, make serious cuts in all government programs by 10% across the board

Are you willing to accept a 10% cut in military spending? If Dems have agreed to $2 trillion in spending cuts, then it’s not as though there’s a failure to find cuts.

Taxes in the US stand at near historic lows and remain among the lowest of any developed country in the world. Yet our military obligations are absolutely unparalleled. It’s not realistic to believe that the US can avoid higher taxes, and Democrats aren’t alone in this belief- Wall Street, credit rating agencies, Greenspan, the CBO, and many leading Republican CEO’s have been saying the same. If you actually examine the numbers in depth, you understand that taxes can’t remain at historic lows given US forever.

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

The real strategy here, I take it, is simply to force President Above-The-Fray into the mix, as he’ll be more reluctant than congressional Democrats to take a hard line on broad tax hikes knowing that it’ll make him the face of that position with the election looming.

Probably a good strategy to get the “big boys” involved, including Obama. If a plan was negotiated by Congress alone, Obama could always veto it and claim that he was not consulted.

it’ll still help the GOP to have O’s fingerprints on a plan that would cut both discretionary and mandatory spending before the Dems’ Mediscare campaign gearing up.

If Republicans were smart (a big IF), they could throw “Mediscare” back in the Dems’ faces, by making it clear that ObamaCare cuts Medicare spending by $500 billion over 10 years, and REPEALING ObamaCare would provide MORE money to Medicare.

Isn’t $2 trillion in cuts over 10 years really not remotely equal to the task of making a dent in our debt problem?

Maybe a moderate dent. $200 billion a year is about 13% of our current deficit, plus the Government could save interest on the “reduced” deficit over 10 years.

Whatever concessions the GOP can get from the Dems, the trick here is to only raise the debt ceiling by ONE YEAR’s worth of deficits. This would force Congress and Obama to repeat this debate NEXT summer, when Obama will be on the ballot.

Steve Z on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Allahpundit, again, the deadline does not mean automatic default.

blink on June 23, 2011 at 2:10 PM

Seriously AP? You actually believe we will default? We only default if Treasury decides domestic spending is more important than or credit. We still collect taxes you know. And the taxes we currently collect cover approximately 70% of our spending. Servicing the debt is easy to do even if the debt ceiling is never raised.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Seriously AP? You actually believe we will default? We only default if Treasury decides domestic spending is more important than or credit. We still collect taxes you know. And the taxes we currently collect cover approximately 70% of our spending. Servicing the debt is easy to do even if the debt ceiling is never raised.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Which means we will default. You forget who is in charge of paying the bills, after all.

Steve Eggleston on June 23, 2011 at 2:17 PM

Dear leader is Mr 11th hour man….he won’t touch it until then whenever then is….nothing sooner than that

cmsinaz on June 23, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Are you willing to accept a 10% cut in military spending? If Dems have agreed to $2 trillion in spending cuts, then it’s not as though there’s a failure to find cuts.

Taxes in the US stand at near historic lows and remain among the lowest of any developed country in the world. Yet our military obligations are absolutely unparalleled. It’s not realistic to believe that the US can avoid higher taxes, and Democrats aren’t alone in this belief- Wall Street, credit rating agencies, Greenspan, the CBO, and many leading Republican CEO’s have been saying the same. If you actually examine the numbers in depth, you understand that taxes can’t remain at historic lows given US forever.

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Amen. But remember, cuts only matter if they are for this year. Future cuts are phantom cuts.

Oh well. We don’t have many leaders in Washington, just talking points robots like Obama and Cantor, slaves to rigid ideologies of idiocy.

BocaJuniors on June 23, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Taxes in the US stand at near historic lows and remain among the lowest of any developed country in the world. Yet our military obligations are absolutely unparalleled.

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Uh, that happened because Bill Clinton and the Democrats left George Bush with al Qaeda.

Next?

Del Dolemonte on June 23, 2011 at 2:20 PM

To let an idiot like Biden preside over debt ceiling talks is idiotic and a farce.

volsense on June 23, 2011 at 2:20 PM

Seriously AP? You actually believe we will default? We only default if Treasury decides domestic spending is more important than or credit. We still collect taxes you know. And the taxes we currently collect cover approximately 70% of our spending. Servicing the debt is easy to do even if the debt ceiling is never raised.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

I’ve thought the same thing. Is there a legal analysis of what the gov’t is actually obligated to pay? And who to pay first? I know that state-to-state it varies as to who is first in line to get paid, but I haven’t seen anything written about the fed gov’t.

Links anyone?

BocaJuniors on June 23, 2011 at 2:21 PM

A couple thoughts:

1. Boehner is supposed to be our tough negotiator now??? God help us.

2. $2 Trillion over 10 years – get serious, that’s not even cutting growth in spending much less cutting real spending.

3. “the Democrats, remember, have already tentatively agreed to something like $2 trillion in cuts over 10 years” – see note 2 above – plus, somehow taxes happen immediately and permanently and cuts fade after a year. First rule is no new taxes, second rule is no new taxes, third rule is if Boehner and the GOP stupidly cave, they damn well better tie any tax increases to real spending cuts so that if spending rises over certain levels, the tax increases automatically are revoked.

Over50 on June 23, 2011 at 2:21 PM

So raise taxes and gain the goodwill of the noodles indies but then lose the base, and in the end everyone will lose when it all collapses.

Forget gold, buy stainless steel.

Bishop on June 23, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Steve Eggleston on June 23, 2011 at 2:17 PM

I don’t believe that is the option he will take. Reducing domestic spending demagogues Republicans more than defaulting. And defaulting means no new borrowing to pay off friends of Obama.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:22 PM

As Congressman Tom McClintock (R-CA) said on KSFO radio the other day, if the debt ceiling is not increased, then the Federal budget must be balanced immediately. Not in 10 years, but right now.

Of course, there’s no political consensus for that, so the US will default–not that there’s anything wrong with that. The good news is that not all of the debt will be defaulted on at the same time. They’ll probably extend the maturities of T-Notes and T-Bonds first. The Chinese are going to be so pissed.

Default is a better option than what the Democrats would like to do. Not only would they raise income taxes, but they would like to seize your IRA (explained away as payback for getting those tax advantages all those years).

All they know is grabbing other people’s money. When the US was first up against the debt limit on May 16, the response from Treasury Secretary Geithner was to get the money from Federal pension funds, until August 2.

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Tax increases are job destroyers.

Any negotiations with Biden at the helm are a joke by definition. Would you buy a used car from him?

Barry Soetero laments having spent a trillion dollars on wars, but sees no irony in the same amount thrown down the sewer for his economic boondoggles.

onlineanalyst on June 23, 2011 at 2:23 PM

The US economy is the biggest in the world. Our economy would be even better if we had a better tax structure. Raising taxes is wrong regardless of how low you think they are right now.

blink on June 23, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Wait, what? Couldn’t a better tax structure involve cutting rates and eliminating loopholes, exceptions, etc?

BocaJuniors on June 23, 2011 at 2:23 PM

We need to stop worrying about this. Do the right thing. Hold firm on spending and taxes regardless of whether the independents “get it.”

By “get it”, I assume you mean fully grasp an ideological stance that has nothing to do with a deep analysis of US spending numbers.

First, you can’t balance the budget without some cuts to military spending. Second, you can’t balance the budget without some tax increases. Listen to the smartest guys on Wall Street and every major credit ratings, not to mention Republicans such as Greenspan or Alan Simpson. Deeply analyze the numbers, and it’s clear that everything must be cut, from Medicare to the military, and taxes must be higher.

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Yet our military obligations are absolutely unparalleled.
bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

Really makes you yearn for the hopey days of 2008 when PBHO promised to bring the troops home, doesn’t it?

*cough LIBYA cough*

Bishop on June 23, 2011 at 2:24 PM

1. Boehner is supposed to be our tough negotiator now??? God help us.

2. $2 Trillion over 10 years – get serious, that’s not even cutting growth in spending much less cutting real spending.

Over50 on June 23, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Exactly. Future cuts = phantom cuts.

BocaJuniors on June 23, 2011 at 2:25 PM

Note to self: Buy gold Hoard Food, drinking water, gasoline, guns & ammo, and build an underground shelter.

portlandon on June 23, 2011 at 2:25 PM

The debt ceiling was supposed to be the GOP’s big card in forcing major concessions on spending. What happened?

For those of you who haven’t seen this in a while, someone addresses the GOP directly here – after the “$100 billion cut” fiasco. Take a listen and consider if your current candidate really measures up.

miConsevative on June 23, 2011 at 2:26 PM

THEATER\

The GOP will cave and give in to all D-RAT demand.

stenwin77 on June 23, 2011 at 2:26 PM

Are you willing to accept a 10% cut in military spending? If Dems have agreed to $2 trillion in spending cuts, then it’s not as though there’s a failure to find cuts.

Taxes in the US stand at near historic lows and remain among the lowest of any developed country in the world. Yet our military obligations are absolutely unparalleled. It’s not realistic to believe that the US can avoid higher taxes, and Democrats aren’t alone in this belief- Wall Street, credit rating agencies, Greenspan, the CBO, and many leading Republican CEO’s have been saying the same. If you actually examine the numbers in depth, you understand that taxes can’t remain at historic lows given US forever.

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

You guys cut Obama’s spending down back down to $150 billion deficit under Bush when we had 2 wars and all the tax cuts and we’ll talk.

Until then it is clear the problem is spending and lack of growth due to Obama’s viciously anti-business agenda.

Chuck Schick on June 23, 2011 at 2:27 PM

I don’t believe that is the option he will take. Reducing domestic spending demagogues Republicans more than defaulting. And defaulting means no new borrowing to pay off friends of Obama.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:22 PM

You assume Obama is rational and cares about the US’ unique position of never defaulting on federal (as opposed to Confederate) debt. I don’t (and can’t).

Steve Eggleston on June 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Just a reminder:

Tax collections could keep pace with those costs if Congress permitted the George W. Bush tax cuts to expire on schedule in 2012 and allowed the alternative minimum tax to hit millions of additional households, the CBO said.

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Just a reminder:

If we taxed everyone at 100% and then redistributed the wealth, everyone would be happy.

Bishop on June 23, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Are you willing to accept a 10% cut in military spending? If Dems have agreed to $2 trillion in spending cuts, then it’s not as though there’s a failure to find cuts.

Taxes in the US stand at near historic lows and remain among the lowest of any developed country in the world. Yet our military obligations are absolutely unparalleled. It’s not realistic to believe that the US can avoid higher taxes, and Democrats aren’t alone in this belief- Wall Street, credit rating agencies, Greenspan, the CBO, and many leading Republican CEO’s have been saying the same. If you actually examine the numbers in depth, you understand that taxes can’t remain at historic lows given US forever.

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM

They could eliminate taxes altogether (LOL) and it won’t make any difference. Certainly spending more isn’t going to make any difference. This isn’t 1955. The rules have changed and it’s a rigged game.

All this stuff on the surface is simply for the Masses, those who pay attention anyway. They’re going to have to raise the debt ceiling.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 23, 2011 at 2:34 PM

What part of “There is no more money” don’t they understand?

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 1:56 PM

Have you ever experienced the reaction of a liberal after he’s been told “there is no more money?” They refuse to we’re broke. Reality and math elude them.

flyfisher on June 23, 2011 at 2:01 PM

They are still fostering the totally insane Idea that National Socialism (or Communism, Progressivism, Fascism, Leninism, etc.)

CAN STILL WORK.

Ergo, they can Steal the money they need to feed the Feral Government’s insatiable maw with property from the ‘Rich’, then the ‘Near Rich’, then the ‘almost rich’, then upper middle class, then the….

Chip on June 23, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Taxes don’t need to be raise. Spending can most certainly be cut. Why are you so in favor of overspending?

It’s easy to stand around and talk about how much money the government wastes, and you’re right, there is waste. But you have to base these decisions on actual analysis of current spending numbers. There has to be more substance to your argument than slogans.

I don’t like spending but Americans want to have a huge federal highway system, medical support of its senior citizens, and a massive military with aircraft carriers and bases around the globe. (And a large standing army that’s ready for war anywhere in the world.) No other country in the Western world faces these costs. Yet you actually believe that we can carry such a burden and still have the lowest tax rates in the Western world? Look at the numbers, they don’t add up.

From one of the most respected venture capitalists in NYC:
http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2011/01/deficit-reduction.html

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:35 PM

We are on a glide path to Greece…

PatriotRider on June 23, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Default is a better option than what the Democrats would like to do. Not only would they raise income taxes, but they would like to seize your IRA (explained away as payback for getting those tax advantages all those years).

This is why I stopped contributing the second that Obama got elected.

teke184 on June 23, 2011 at 2:37 PM

It is all a charade. They are arguing over pin money. They haven’t begun to seriously address the financial crisis we are facing.

STOP SPENDING!

STOP SPENDING!

STOP SPENDING!

STOP SPENDING!

novaculus on June 23, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Just a reminder:

Tax collections could keep pace with those costs if Congress permitted the George W. Bush tax cuts to expire on schedule in 2012 and allowed the alternative minimum tax to hit millions of additional households, the CBO said.

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Easy for you to say since you don’t pay taxes and live off the Government teat.

Knucklehead on June 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM

So? We will ignore the fact that the CBO is wrong because the CBO only measures these things in a linear manner. They never take into account the fact that these tax increases will shrink the economy, thus reducing tax revenues. But even if we accept such linear analysis for arguments sake we have a spending problem, not a tax problem. You can make a silly argument that if we all paid a 100% tax rate we could all get gold caps for our teeth. Of course such a tax rate would reduce our economy to zero. But hey, it looks good on paper, right?

Kind of like Communism…

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM

the US unique position of never defaulting on federal debt

The United States has defaulted on its debt before, in 1790, and again in 1933, when FDR repudiated the gold standard. The US was also in technical default briefly during the Carter administration–in 1978, if I recall correctly.

Emperor Norton on June 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM

smartest” guys on wall street work for credit rating agencies instead of hedge funds

Credit ratings agencies are important because their ratings dictate the cost of current US debt. You can’t ignore them.

As for the hedge fund guys, I agree their ability to analyze numbers is often second to none, and they too recognize that higher taxes are inevitable. On Wall Street, there isn’t any real controversy.

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM

Bishop on June 23, 2011 at 2:34 PM

Well, I mention a very reasonable and realistic policy proposal, and you break out a fallacy. I’m going to go ahead and declare victory. This has been fun!

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Steve Eggleston on June 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM

I have no argument for that other than to repeat my belief that I don’t think he will order a default.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:39 PM

First rule is no new taxes, second rule is no new taxes, third rule is if Boehner and the GOP stupidly cave, they damn well better tie any tax increases to real spending cuts so that if spending rises over certain levels, the tax increases automatically are revoked.

Over50 on June 23, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Message to Boehner and ALL REPUBLICANS CURRENTLY IN OFFICE:

RAISE TAXES AND YOU WILL BE PLAYING GOLF WITH OBAMA IN 2013–GUARENTEED!

Rovin on June 23, 2011 at 2:41 PM

They never take into account the fact that these tax increases will shrink the economy, thus reducing tax revenues.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM

While possible, you cannot treat this as a certainty. However, coupled with, say, and end to our wars of choice, our debt problem becomes much more manageable. Given the choice between a tax increase/end to wars vs. a substantial cut in retirement and health benefits, what do you think voters will choose?

Simply sunset the Bush tax cuts and the wars. You’re all for sunsetting federal legislation, no?

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Just a reminder:

Tax collections could keep pace with those costs if Congress permitted the George W. Bush tax cuts to expire on schedule in 2012 and allowed the alternative minimum tax to hit millions of additional households, the CBO said.

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Haha nice try. What they’re saying is that if you apply the $350-$400B static cost from the Bush taxes and the ~$100B from the AMT you’d be able to pay for JUST the INFLATION in medicare spending. You still have a $1.5 trillion deficit and another $60+ trillion in unfunded liabilities if you believe the government, or $120 trillion if you believe US debt clock.

And what do you think levying $500 BILLION a year in taxes- the vast majority of it on the poor and middle class – will do to the economy?

Chuck Schick on June 23, 2011 at 2:43 PM

It turns out that, due to a glitch in the law, roughly three million middle-income Americans could wind up on Medicaid – which was designed to assist the country’s poorest citizens.

“It’s gonna cost about $450 billion over 10 years,” Senator John Barrasso. R-Wyo., who is also a surgeon, warns. Barrasso says it’s yet another burden for average Americans. “Who’s gonna pay for that – the taxpayers, people who are paying their bills every day,” he says.

Democrats acknowledge there is a problem within the health care law that could have an unintended impact on Medicaid.

“I do think that between now and 2014, sooner rather than later, we should go back and take another look at this,” Congressman Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said Wednesday. Van Hollen also admitted that the potential snafu was discussed while the health care law was being drafted. It stems from a problem about how the word “income” is defined under the law now – and how that definition is set to change.

Richard S. Foster, Chief Actuary for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, says it’s a worry that keeps him up at night. “We need to do something about this,” he said.

Don’t believe this for a second. The left will lie to you, impertinently, while scrooming you of all you work for.

May they be punished for their thuggery.

Schadenfreude on June 23, 2011 at 2:43 PM

I’m buying guns, not gold. I just wish I had more to “invest”.

Mord on June 23, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Taxes in the US stand at near historic lows and remain among the lowest of any developed country in the world

bayam on June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM


The President’s Low-Tax Lie

Revising History: In the left’s endless attempt to push tax hikes on our beleaguered economy, it’s now peddling the bogus claim that tax rates are the lowest they’ve been in 60 years.

The claim is misleading at best.

It’s true that tax revenues as a share of gross domestic product have fallen in the past three years.

They were 17.5% in 2008 and 14.9% in 2009 and 2010.

But this is simply a result of the prolonged recession and terrible recovery that killed incomes and corporate profits, blowing a hole in federal revenues. The amount of money raised through the individual income tax fell 21% from 2007 to 2009, while corporate tax payments plunged 63%.

Chip on June 23, 2011 at 2:44 PM

Did you see Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer admitting today that tax cuts are good for the economy. Then they ran out calling the GOP hypocrites trying to “sabotage the economy.” What buffoons!

poorrichardsnews on June 23, 2011 at 2:45 PM

DO NOT RAISE THE DEBT CEILING

If they truly want to CUT,CAP and BALANCE why even consider raising the ceiling?

Isn’t the debt ceiling itself a CAP, and by not raising it will force the country to CUT insane spending and compel government to BALANCE the budget?

Why is raising the ceiling is even an option…it makes no sense.

Is there a downside, though, in going so far as to break off talks? Pew’s new poll shows independents almost evenly divided on which side to blame if there’s no debt deal.

If there is no debt deal the GOP will get the credit not the blame…

meanwhile…

“Stealth QE3″ Comes to Fruition – Soaring Inflation is Next

equanimous on June 23, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Well, I mention a very reasonable and realistic policy proposal, and you break out a fallacy. I’m going to go ahead and declare victory. This has been fun!
ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:39 PM

I’ve got a feeling you believe that ObamaCare is a reasonable and realistic policy proposal too.

But hey, Pyrrhus declared victory too, so you are in good company.

Bishop on June 23, 2011 at 2:46 PM

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:42 PM

We don’t need a substantial cut to retirement and senior health benefits. They need to be restructured. The Ryan plan for example for Medicare. And 100′s of billions in cuts can be found by eliminating useless agencies like The Department of Agriculture, The Department of Education, The Department of Energy and The Department of Commerce.

The cuts and restructuring opportunities exist if only we pull our heads out of the sand.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:47 PM

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Which “war of choice”? The one in Lybia? Or the one in Yemen? Possibly, you could be talking about Obama’s massive escalation in Afghanistan and his love of drone strikes…it’s not like drones and hellfire missiles are free. You can’t blame it on Iraq because Biden claimed that the victory in Iraq was one of Obama’s greatest accomplishments.

Mord on June 23, 2011 at 2:48 PM

They never take into account the fact that these tax increases will shrink the economy, thus reducing tax revenues.

NotCoach on June 23, 2011 at 2:38 PM

While possible, you cannot treat this as a certainty.

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:42 PM

Are you trying to tell us that there is no certainty when addressing the concept of punishment and reward?

Are you trying to tell us that robbing people of their hard earned property doesn’t have an adverse effect on their behavior?

Chip on June 23, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Bishop on June 23, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Go on home, boy.

ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Well, I’d say they’ve retreated to do what they always do, protect their own career.

The GOP are the real traitors – they promise small gov’t and never deliver.

The dems at least have the position that they always favored big gov’t. So, in that sense, at least they’re successful.

Tragically, maliciously, devistatingly successful, but successful.

Pablo Snooze on June 23, 2011 at 2:50 PM

The GOP sucks.

Bugler on June 23, 2011 at 2:51 PM

It’s time to stop borrowing money. Just stop it.

If not us, who. If not now, when.

Failure of leadership, indeed.

Paul-Cincy on June 23, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Gold is about $1500 / troy oz. Try real estate instead,

I can get real estate for less than an oz. of gold?

I’m in!

roy_batty on June 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Just a reminder:

Tax collections could keep pace with those costs if Congress permitted the George W. Bush tax cuts to expire on schedule in 2012 and allowed the alternative minimum tax to hit millions of additional households, the CBO said.
ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Worthless projection based on static analysis. If you want to further decimate the middle class, kill what’s left of the retail sector, and intensify the crisis in the residential real estate market, then allow millions of households to get hit by AMT.

flyfisher on June 23, 2011 at 2:54 PM

I’m betting on Pres(id)ent 0 to come in and offer a $6 T spending cut, all in future years #11 and #12.

Oleta on June 23, 2011 at 2:54 PM

Exit question via Red State: Isn’t $2 trillion in cuts over 10 years really not remotely equal to the task of making a dent in our debt problem? The debt ceiling was supposed to be the GOP’s big card in forcing major concessions on spending. What happened?

What happened was that back when the Republican Party still had a little credibility, thanks to the tea party, they broke their promise to cut $100 billion dollars and lied about it, and Red State participated in perpetuating the sham CR bill. They even banned me at the time because I questioned their fictional analysis about how they were really cutting 78 billion and not 40 billion and I told them I didn’t even believe the 40 billion figure, and it turned out the next day I was right.

But my personal story aside, my point is that the RINO Party had an opportunity to prove they were serious this time and they weren’t. Thanks to the right wing meme machine the Republican Party got away with it, and hence they know they’ll get away with it next time too.

If Red State and others had actually held the Republican Party’s feet to the fire to keep that promise then they’d be fighting much harder to cut spending today, but since nobody really seems to care if they really cut spending and keep their promises, then they won’t.

So when Boehner get’s done with his dog and pony show and they raise taxes and cut 200 billion dollars or whatever from the ’12 budget, (which we’ll later find out didn’t cut anything at all), the Republican Party knows that Red State and others will reinforce the funny-numbers regardless and help them get away with it.

FloatingRock on June 23, 2011 at 2:57 PM

Go on home, boy.
ernesto on June 23, 2011 at 2:49 PM

As least you didn’t use your favorite slur of “shriv” against me; you must have attended diversity training lately, huh?

Bishop on June 23, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Whats the penalty for cashing out a 401k ?

orbitalair on June 23, 2011 at 2:59 PM

Comment pages: 1 2