Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Cliff That Isn't
Shout Bits Blog ^ | 12/24/2012 | Shout Bits

Posted on 12/24/2012 9:38:39 AM PST by Shout Bits

Washington is abuzz about the Fiscal Cliff, a combination of tax increases and modest cuts in spending growth. Since the Old Media and most of Washington always favor tax increases, the fear must be over spending. But even with the cuts, Washington will remain overfunded. So, what is not to like about the Fiscal Cliff?

The Cliff allows for tax rates to return to those Pres. Clinton approved in the early 1990's. Most taxpayers will see their rates increase and some people who now pay no income tax will have to begin paying. In a 2007 primary debate, Pres. Obama said it was the country's moral obligation to repeal all of the Bush tax cuts, and the OM continues to churn the notion that the Clinton tax increases caused the prosperity of the 1990's. Now that the Democrats are in charge, most of the Clinton tax rates are unacceptable. If, as Obama now claims, the Bush tax cuts are appropriate for 98% of Americans (a fatuous figure since nearly half of Americans pay no income tax at all), does that mean Bush was 98% right in his tax policy? Does that mean Clinton was 98% wrong in his tax policy? The Cliff's tax rates are a tool by which Obama is dividing the US along phony class lines. If everyone's tax rates go up, Obama's us-vs.-them, punish our enemies rhetoric becomes powerless.

The argument against the Bush tax cuts has always been that it lead to the budget deficit crisis. However, even Obama admits that his tax increase for 2% of Americans will not significantly reduce the deficit. Instead, the tax increase he seeks is a matter of justice, or as Warren Buffett claims, tax increases would "raise the morale of the middle class." Obama and Buffett seem to be admitting that overall, the Bush tax cuts are not the problem they and the OM portrayed them to be, but rather the Bush tax rates only need some window dressing for "fairness" and "morale."

The Cliff also purports to cut spending. In reality, the sequester somewhat reduces the rate of increase in spending. By any measure, all spending will remain uncut. The real-dollar per-capita budgets of all major departments will be higher than under Clinton, including Defense and HHS. In every sense the government will be better funded than under Clinton. Was Clinton an evil plutocrat who hated the poor and minorities? Further, the sequester does not address entitlements such as Medicare and Social Security. Those are the budgets whose out of control growth will destroy the US. Washington's big spenders know they were elected to increase spending each year, and any slowdown would be against the interests of their donors.

Let the Cliff happen. Why not test the notion that Clinton's tax rates caused prosperity? Why not see what would happen if the rate of growth in Washington's spending was cut slightly? Why not make Obama take some responsibility for his spending habits? Why not call the OM's bluff that the Cliff would be the end of all things? The Cliff and the negotiations surrounding it are a fabrication. The Cliff's tax rates are Democrat tax rates, voted for by Democrats signed by a Democrat, and more recently endorsed by the Democrat Obama. The Cliff's spending cuts are a Democrat fabrication as well. By pretending a slightly slower rate of increase in spending is a cut, Democrats built a firewall against real reform. To balance the Federal budget, spending must be cut not by $800bln over ten years, but by $10 trillion. Let the Cliff happen to deprive the Democrats of the lies they and the OM use to protect corruption, waste, and unsustainable entitlement scams.

Shout Bits can be found on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/ShoutBits


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: fiscalcliff

1 posted on 12/24/2012 9:38:50 AM PST by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
If American goes "over the cliff," the MSM will blame the Republicans, etc. But after a few months of the MSM and Democrats blaming the Republicans, the average American will begin to wonder "Why hasn't Obama saved us?"

People will start calling for Obama to save them... Eventually, it will become clear to even the dumbest Democrat that Obama is nothing but an empty suit. Just as he was powerless to bring the 2016 Olympics to Chicago, Obama will be powerless to fix anything.

When American goes over the cliff, Obama's "stash" disappears. And, when Obama's stash disappears, so does his support.

2 posted on 12/24/2012 9:52:51 AM PST by Cowboy Bob (Soon the "invisible hand" will press the economic "reset" button.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

The real issue is the debt limit.

Issuing more IOUs will further devalue the dollar.
Only a mater of time before other countries switch to
gold as standard for payment.

Fixed income and min wagers are hit the hardest as they have
no way to keep up with the increased cost of living.


3 posted on 12/24/2012 10:01:39 AM PST by jonose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob; Clint N. Suhks

“...when Obama’s stash disappears...”

EBT Cards zero-out. “Takers” go nuts.

SHTF.

Lock ‘n load.


4 posted on 12/24/2012 10:02:23 AM PST by carriage_hill (Have A Very Merry Christmas & A Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

“modest cuts in spending growth”

$100B cut in the DoD budget is NOT “modest” and they are REAL cuts, to CURRENT BUDGETS, NOT in “growth”.

So, Now that we know where this clown author is coming from, there’s no need to read any further.


5 posted on 12/24/2012 10:05:31 AM PST by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
But even with the cuts, Washington will remain overfunded.

This makes no sense. If Washington remains "overfunded", then why do we have trillion dollar deficits??

I'm not sure if the writer used the wrong word or if his politicalspeak got in the way. Regardless of which it was, it distracts from his point, which also doesn't make a lot of sense, either.

The fical cliff will likely affect Washington the least. Too many bloated egos and the bloated incomes that goes with it.

Those who will be the most affected are John and Jane Average American Taxpayer. These are the people who will see the greatest impact on their lifestyle and they will have the hardest time trying to scale back to what they can afford with their new, reduced income levels. And, what SHOULD make people even angrier is that Washington is happy to discuss cutting everyone else's disposable income, as long as theirs remains untouched. IOW, they are saying "I got mine, too bad about yours!"

IMO, the entire fiscal cliff is political theater about Washington trying to cover its collective butt. When the tax increases and spending cuts kick in, The POTUS and the Congress are going to feel anger and hear language from John and Jane Average American Taxpayer that would make a sailor blush. THAT'S what they are trying to avoid . . . . . . . . . . unsuccessfully, so far. Even WITH Bawlin' Boehner's caving on the tax increases.

6 posted on 12/24/2012 10:09:09 AM PST by DustyMoment (Congress - another name for anti-American criminals!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

That is $100bln over 9 years, not per year. The inflation adjusted military budget will increase, not be cut.

It is true that the military growth is cut more than HHS, but the military is not cut at all.

I may be a clown, but I am not a sucker.


7 posted on 12/24/2012 10:23:18 AM PST by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DustyMoment

Washington is overfunded both through over taxation and over borrowing. Both sources need to be restricted until the Federal budget is less than 18% of GDP (the sustainable spending rate based on historic tax receipts).

I should have been more clear.


8 posted on 12/24/2012 10:25:56 AM PST by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

We went over the “cliff” and we passed the real deficit cap a couple of years back when investors stopped buying our debt.

When the Fed had to start printing money to “finance” our debt is when we went over the cliff. Arguing about whether we hit bottom at 100 mph or 99.9 mph is a waste of breath and energy.

Any plan that fails to address the fact that the government is approximately twice the size we can pay for, is a waste of the paper it is printed on.


9 posted on 12/24/2012 10:26:19 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits
The Cliff and the negotiations surrounding it are a fabrication. The Cliff's tax rates are Democrat tax rates, voted for by Democrats signed by a Democrat, and more recently endorsed by the Democrat Obama. The Cliff's spending cuts are a Democrat fabrication as well... To balance the Federal budget, spending must be cut not by $800bln over ten years, but by $10 trillion. Let the Cliff happen to deprive the Democrats of the lies they and the OM use to protect corruption, waste, and unsustainable entitlement scams.

I could not agree with you more, and I think it bears repeating.

10 posted on 12/24/2012 10:32:06 AM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Bump for later reading.


11 posted on 12/24/2012 12:11:20 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (I want a hippopotamus for Christmas! Only a hippopotamus will do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks Shout Bits.
...the Fiscal Cliff, a combination of tax increases and modest cuts in spending growth. Since the Old Media and most of Washington always favor tax increases, the fear must be over spending. But even with the cuts, Washington will remain overfunded. So, what is not to like about the Fiscal Cliff? The Cliff allows for tax rates to return to those Pres. Clinton approved in the early 1990's. Most taxpayers will see their rates increase and some people who now pay no income tax will have to begin paying. In a 2007 primary debate, Pres. Obama said it was the country's moral obligation to repeal all of the Bush tax cuts, and the OM continues to churn the notion that the Clinton tax increases caused the prosperity of the 1990's. Now that the Democrats are in charge, most of the Clinton tax rates are unacceptable. If, as Obama now claims, the Bush tax cuts are appropriate for 98% of Americans (a fatuous figure since nearly half of Americans pay no income tax at all), does that mean Bush was 98% right in his tax policy? Does that mean Clinton was 98% wrong in his tax policy? The Cliff's tax rates are a tool by which Obama is dividing the US along phony class lines. If everyone's tax rates go up, Obama's us-vs.-them, punish our enemies rhetoric becomes powerless.
Just bringing up the Fiscal Cliff was meme-building extraordinaire by the Partisan Media Shills.


12 posted on 12/24/2012 6:56:22 PM PST by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Mostly, you’re ILL-INFORMED!!

“half-trillion dollars in automatic cuts over the next decade”

>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/12/pentagon-begins-planning-for-500b-in-fiscal-cliff-cuts/<

This doesn’t even address further proposed cuts.


13 posted on 12/24/2012 9:02:32 PM PST by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Just because you’ll ask, rather than do your own research:

“The estimated $500 billion in cuts over the next decade would be in addition to the administration’s already planned cut of $487 billion over the next decade that it said was guided by a strategic review.”

and, yes, it’s from the same article!

>http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/12/pentagon-begins-planning-for-500b-in-fiscal-cliff-cuts/<

Oh, My!
That IS $100 Billion per year!


14 posted on 12/24/2012 9:05:43 PM PST by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

You said $100bln, not I.

Anyway, the other money is Obama taking credit for the savings from ending the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. It is not a cut to the peacetime military budget.


15 posted on 12/25/2012 6:41:39 AM PST by Shout Bits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Shout Bits

Uh...here’s the full text of YOUR post #7:

“That is $100bln over 9 years, not per year. The inflation adjusted military budget will increase, not be cut.

It is true that the military growth is cut more than HHS, but the military is not cut at all.

I may be a clown, but I am not a sucker.”

That is YOU claiming that MY $100Bln claim applies to 9 yrs, not per year.

That means:
1 - YOU ARE WRONG
2 - YOU KNOW THAT and yet you chose to “Misrepresent your position”!


16 posted on 12/25/2012 12:24:38 PM PST by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: G Larry; Shout Bits

Oh!

Did I forget to mention?

Your ignorance of the facts and unwillingness to acknowledge them, is the reason I suggested IGNORING YOUR POST IN THE FIRST PLACE!


17 posted on 12/25/2012 12:29:19 PM PST by G Larry (Which of Obama's policies do you think I'd support if he were white?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson