General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat happens if we go over the "cliff"?
Do people expect that if we go over the cliff, the Republicans will magically agree to extend unemployment benefits, invest in infrastructure, cut taxes for the 98% w/o cutting it for the 2%, pass the doc fix, patch the AMT, and raise the debt ceiling for 2 years without any cuts in Medicare/SS/social spending?
How will going over the cliff take away the GOP's leverage in the debt ceiling fight?
I don't understand what the argument is for going over the cliff. How would that make us any better off in terms of negotiating? How would going over the cliff guarantee that entitlement programs are protected?
msongs
(67,417 posts)democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)Let's just say we go over the cliff, and then Congress comes back and passes the tax cut for the 98%. Don't the Republicans then still have the leverage to demand spending cuts in mid-February when the debt ceiling has to be raised?
Please, don't respond by saying that the 14th Amendment makes the debt ceiling unconstitutional. The White House looked into that route and decided it was too risky.
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)Go over the cliff.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)The president is not signing any deal (other than maybe a straight cut on middle class taxes) w/o at least a year, probably 2 extension on the debt ceiling. That much is clear.
Autumn
(45,107 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)It's because the new Congress coming in at the start of the year will have MORE Democrats, and Reid is working on changing the fillibuster rules in the Senate. It will be easier to get Democratic bills passed.
After the tax cuts - all of them - expire (which raises the rates on everyone, even the very wealthy), the Democrats will introduce bill(s) to lower the tax rates for the middle class. It's not definite they will be able to get that passed, but some think it's likely. Maybe even some Republicans will have a hard time explaining to their constituents why they voted against giving middle class citizens a small tax cut.
If all turns out well, the country gets tax rates hiked on the wealthy, and the rest of the citizens keep the tax rates they have now.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)Let's just say things go the way you say. Won't the GOP still be able to demand spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling?
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)We won't get any deal with the debt ceiling.
Go over the cliff.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)It's become pretty clear that the president is not going to agree to any deal now that does not extend the debt ceiling fight for at least a year, hopefully 2.
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)after major losses in 2014 in the House and complete loss of control of the Senate since he'll have given away the only reason lots of people vote Dem.
2014 will be the biggest mid term bloodbath for a sitting president in history if he caves.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)what I've heard about that is that the Republicans got the main blame for the debt ceiling fiasco last year, which caused America's credit rating to go down, so it's not likely the Republicans will hold that hostage.
It's not an ideal plan. But it's a plan.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)It wouldn't have come to this if we hadn't let them take more and more hostages working foolish deals that have built on each other to bring us to the present cross.
Hell, before that accepting their idiotic framing and running with it was flirting with the event horizon.
Each time the Tinkerbelle fans said to clap harder and bragged on the greatness of the deal.
The one leading directly to this "cliff" was the Great, Great Granddaddy of a milkshake drinking now many of the same voices are feinting in aisles at the prospect. What the fuck? C'mon, y'all are full of shit.
0rganism
(23,957 posts)"Going over the cliff", as it were, allows Democrats to yank that political carpet right out from under them.
Once we're "over the cliff", President Obama and the Senate Democrats can propose measures that cut taxes on 98% of income while restoring some of the social programs attacked by sequestration. Then if the Republicans refuse to go along, the Democrats can beat them like a rug with their refusals in the next election. They don't want this to happen, so they'd have incentive to cut a deal.
Correspondingly, it's also in their best interest to try to reach a deal before sequestration happens: they have a bigger house majority, more leverage in the Senate than they might in the next congress, and they don't risk looking like tax raisers.
It's always been in our interest for Obama to drive a hard bargain now to get a better one later.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)It seems like that is part of what the president is driving a hard bargain for, and rightfully so, because otherwise even if we get all of that in the next Congress can't they still demand "earned benefit" cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling?
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)So screw 'em.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)Which is why I think President Obama is willing to play ball with them.
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)You'll have the biggest mid term losses for the party of a sitting president in history over this deal.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)The chained CPI is complicated and the big cuts don't kick in until way down the line. I doubt most people will have noticed by 2014.
Hopefully by the time they do Congress will start patching it to prevent it from going into effect like they do with Sustainable Growth Rate in Medicare (the doc fix).
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)No reason to ever vote again.
And I know dozens of people who only vote for Dems to protect these programs AND THEY ARE PAYING ATTENTION.
The debacle will be worse than 2010.
All because Dems like you are chickenshit to hold the GOP to the deal they already cut.
Republicans will be able to TRUTHFULLY run on "Democrats cut your social Security", and that will be damned attractive to people of my age.
democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)Most people don't follow the day to day of this. They won't notice the cuts until they get bigger, and by that point they won't remember how they got there. Plus, I am hoping if they pass this it will be like the doc fix, where they patch it every year once the cuts get steeper to prevent them from actually happening.
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)It will DESTROY the Democratic Party.
Take that to the bank.
0rganism
(23,957 posts)They may not be "following the day to day", but they'll sure as shit notice that when the buying power of their SocSec check drops through the floor. If the Dems let this happen, they'd better have a damn good plan for changing it back within a year or all hell will break loose.
"Hope" won't cut it on this, we need a near-certainty.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)Better to write in Mickey Mouse in spot than go into the uncounted majority, a narrowing electorate allows cover for the shenanigans.
They are fine with not voting, what sets off foaming at the mouth is any pressure of any sort outside the duopoly.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)democrattotheend
(11,605 posts)What makes you so sure of that?
kentuck
(111,103 posts)with the stipulation that they be made permanent. We will be in the same situation as we are today, except the Treasury will have more money coming into it to pay for the social programs that will be needed to pay for the Republicans' dereliction.
They will continue the negotiation, just as they are today. The stock market will have a small drop at first but will recover when they see that the world is not going to end. People will finally wake up and call their congressmen when they see that they are paying more in taxes.
Both sides will blame the other.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)still_one
(92,219 posts)be worse
If we go over the cliff, at least a few days ago the republicans would have been blamed. Now, with Obama talking about cutting COLA and other things, he is making himself part of the problem