Obama/Dem Hat Trick: 2nd Stimulus - DADT Repeal - START Treaty (and some others too) CHUH-CHING!!

[RBInMaine]

Obama and Dems pulled off what was damn well no "lame duck" session, winning significant victories on several pieces of very important and even landmark legislation. This accomplishment could not have happened without the Democratic Party, and the base should be thrilled. Yes, I know the tax bill with the extension for the rich was a tough pill to swallow, but there was just no way to get around it, time was of the essence, and as much as Mitch McASSOLE likes to say it was "essentially a Republican bill," that is a load of crap. It got the middle class cuts and several other stimulus cuts extended too as well as unemployment insurance. PLENTY of TeaPukes don't like it, and plenty more are screeching at their own GOPukers for everything else R's "caved" on.

The base should be very pleased overall. Obama and Dems should be well rewarded by the base in 2012.
2011 is looking like a year for some significant economic improvement, and, if Obama and Dems play their cards right, they can FRAME UP the R's for significant falls. The House Pukes are going to be stupid enough to think they were sent there just to undo things the D's did over 2009 and 2010. That WAS NOT the message of the election. The election was about frustration over the economy and the enthusiasm gap. If the GOPukes think that Americans, even most of those who voted for them, just want them to undo things or say NO to things, to re-fight the fights of the last two years, Americans will throw them out on their fucking asshat asses come Nov. 2012. Obama and Dems just need to frame it up and MESSAGE it right. Americans want PROGRESS and ACTION for the MIDDLE CLASS.
If we play it right, we are going to have one hell of a 2012.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RBInMaine]

2. Give it up. You are DEEP in the minority on this. Get out of the fringe and onto the planet.

You'll notice than MANY economists and commentators are calling it the "2nd Stimulus."

[MadHound]

5. No, a lot of political commentators and paid shills are calling it a second stimulus,

But the economic reality of tax breaks is very simple: Tax cuts and tax cuts are, bar none, the worst form of economic stimuli going. This is a simple, basic Econ 101 fact. You can put whatever shade of lipstick you want on that pig, but it is still a pig.

We've already had nearly eight years of the Bush tax cuts and they did nothing that was considered stimulative. What makes you think that another two years of the Obama tax cuts will do anything different?

Never thought I would see a professed Democrat, on a Democratic web site, singing the praise of tinkle on economics.

[RBInMaine]

9. Boy, you really are a glass-half-empty person aren't you. Pretty sad.

[MadHound]

14. No, not at all,

I just don't think that we should try and label a practice that is detrimental to our long term economic health as a "stimulus" when it is anything but.

We have been practicing supply side economics in this country for the past thirty years, and look at the mess we're in. What makes you think that more of the same is going to produce a different result?

[girl gone mad]

36. And you're cheering for the Bush tax cuts. n/t

[dennis4868]

45. are you saying Paul Krugman is a paid shill

even tonight he sais the tax cut deal includes economic stimulus....

[leveymg]

6. Notice what MANY economists and commentors called Bush's tax cuts a "stimulus."

And, they're highly-paid experts, so they MUST have been right. Right?

[golddigger]

8. Where's my fucking boots, the shit is gettind deep in here.

[leveymg]

3. And, failing to let the Bush tax cuts expire, they had to raid the Social Security Trust to do it!

The capacity for self-delusion among some never ceases to amaze.

Apparently, the White House press corps is gullible enough to be impressed.

Mission Accomplished.

[vaberella]

20. Provide me with the language where it states in the bill that SS is paying for it?!

Please.

[leveymg]

28. The biggest item in the so-called 2nd Stim is the cut in SS withholding.

That amounted to $112 billion - virtually the same as the $114B extension of upper-bracket cuts. See, http://www.whitehouse.gov/taxcut What else do you need to know?

[emulatorloo]

40. The twelve month program does not affect social security revenues.

[former9thward]

42. I can't believe anyone actually believes it will only last 12 months.

No one will want to be accused of raising taxes, especially in an election year.

[vaberella]

43. I want to see the language in the bill itself that says that SS will be paying for this.

Because from what I'm reading...no one is sure where the cut will be coming from.

[leveymg]

47. The "2nd stim" will have to come out of future cuts to spending (read social programs).

The $114 billion extension of upper class tax cuts and the $112 billion opening raid into the SS Trust Fund will have to be made up by cuts in general expenditures. That will most likely come out of cuts to social spending.

[Cirque du So-What]

7. Do you work? Do you pay taxes?

If so, will you sock away the difference between what you will be paying in taxes on January 1, 2011, and what you would have been paying if the tax cuts were allowed to expire? Or will you spend that money? If you have the luxury of saving the difference, count yourself lucky; millions are breathing a sigh of relief because they won't be paying more in taxes. Millions of people will continue putting the dollars that would have gone toward taxes back into the economy, providing a de facto stimulus to the economy.

I now await the inevitable stream of invective that is directed - with apparent impunity - toward all & sundry who dare to disagree.

[MadHound]

10. No stream of invective, just one simple economic fact

It has been shown time and again that tax cuts, no matter whether they are directed at the rich, middle class or poor, are the least effective form of economic stimulus going, period. Eight years of the Bush tax cuts gave us negative job growth and a slack economy. What makes you think that anything is going to change now that they are the Obama tax cuts?

[RBInMaine]

15. You need a civics lesson and reality check. You are DEEP in the minority on this issue.

NO ONE disagrees that the tax extensions for the rich were needless, but you have to pass what you CAN pass. And this needed to be passed SOON. Please, I implore, get a middle school civics text and read it.

[MadHound]

16. What needed to be passed soon? n/t

[leveymg]

17. Stop being so f-cking condescending toward those who disagree with you, RB.

You need a manners lesson, and are digging yourself deeper.

[RBInMaine]

25. Oh please. This person has been less than civil in his/her comments.

[kenfrequed]

24. What was so desperate?

We could have moved closer to a surplus to be honest and decreasing revenue when we are in debt takes us farther from that point. If the previous poster needs a basic civics lesson, then I would say anyone thinking that this tax cut is a great idea needs a lesson in basic mathematics.

I think we could have won a PR victory, a strategic victory, and a policy victory if we would have toed the line on 'snobs versus slobs' and kept it at that. This was a capitulation without cause and with no long term benefits.

We gave them a long term policy goal, increased the deficit, and really only walked away with temporary unemployment benefits. You do realize that the Republicans are going to be demanding cuts in social services and federal assistance programs later on down the road when we go increasingly towards austerity mode. And now that we have further cracked the social security-general revenue barrier, they are going to claim that Social Security is costing money from the general revenue which will create an argument to alter it.

The Tax bill was a lose-lose-lose.

[displacedvermoter]

41. Use "POUTRAGE" Goddamn it!

When talking down to people you don't know on the Internets!

[Cirque du So-What]

22. I agree where tax cuts for the rich are concerned

but I disagree where tax cuts for the middle class are concerned, and so does this guy:

Economist Mark Zandi of Moody's Analytics estimates that every dollar spent making the Bush income tax cuts permanent generates only 32 cents of economic activity. Comparatively, every dollar spent on unemployment assistance generates $1.61 worth of economic activity, a dollar of spending on infrastructure yields $1.57 and a dollar in assistance to states to prevent layoffs of teachers or first responders yields $1.41. Tax cuts for the wealthy are simply not a good way to stimulate the economy.

http://www.epi.org/analysis_and_opinion/entry/let_the_tax_cuts_for_the_rich_expire/

If you can demonstrate a credible argument against tax cuts for the middle class and poor, I'd be interested in seeing it.

[MadHound]

27. Then I suggest that you go back to school and take Econ 101

I took basic Macro just a few years ago, and while I could go up in the attic and dig out my books to quote you chapter and verse, I just don't feel like doing all of that for a simple internet discussion. My suggestion, go educate yourself rather than rely on others to do so for you. Go to your local college library and look it up, it shouldn't be that hard.

Furthermore, Zandi of Moody's, is dramatically overstating the money multiplier effect of tax cuts. Most economists that I've seen put the multiplier effect for all Bush tax cuts at 1.23, and tax cuts for the rich at 1.06.

[Cirque du So-What]

31. I took macro & microeconomics in school too

GAWD, could you POSSIBLY be ANY more insulting & condescending? PUKE!

[MadHound]

33. Well then, you should already know this stuff!

Why are you ignoring the obvious then? Why are you praising policy that you know, as well as I do, is ultimately very destructive to our economy?

[girl gone mad]

37. Did you actually read what you posted?

Economist Mark Zandi of Moody's Analytics estimates that every dollar spent making the Bush income tax cuts permanent generates only 32 cents of economic activity. Comparatively, every dollar spent on unemployment assistance generates $1.61 worth of economic activity, a dollar of spending on infrastructure yields $1.57 and a dollar in assistance to states to prevent layoffs of teachers or first responders yields $1.41. Tax cuts for the wealthy are simply not a good way to stimulate the economy.

If you think that's a good ROI, I've got some other stuff to sell you..

[leveymg]

12. You do realize that this approach will cost us far more in the long-run?

Not only in terms of paying additional interest on additional public debt, and the reduced solvency of the SS Trust Fund, but also in the inevitable hit to the bonds markets and the financial system, and the currency. This nice gift to the upper brackets wasn't free. We'll be paying a lot more, for a long time, in many ways.

[rapturedbyrobots]

35. yup

the neoliberals are playing the long con. they'll make trillions off this in the next 10 years. meanwhile they got us fighting each other for a couple hundred bucks. sad.

[vaberella]

19. The Bush tax cuts included tax cuts for the MIDDLE CLASS. This can't be ignored.

If Obama didn't extend this...the Middle Class would get nothing, because all other measures to push tax cuts for the MC and not the rich failed in the House TWICE!

[MadHound]

23. So we would go back to paying taxes at the Clinton rates,

The same rates that were in effect when we had a surplus in the government and a decent economy.

Tax cuts are the least effective form of economic stimulus going, period. Furthermore, they are part of that Republican mantra, supply side economics. Supply side economics don't work, so why should we continue to pursue them with such zeal?

Furthermore, this sort of added debt is in danger of ripping our economy a new one. Moody's is considering lowering our credit rating because of this. China and Russia are going off the dollar as their currency of exchange in bilateral trade deals. Oil exporting countries are starting to switch to a basketful of currencies to replace the petrodollar (part of the reason why gas is going up). All of these actions are due to the staggering debt we have. Why should we add even more debt when we're collapsing under what we have now?

[derby378]

39. Much as I hate to admit it, exactly so

Extending the Bush tax cuts for the upper class is just another way of continuing Reagan's failed mantra that "Government is the problem" and starving needed social services so that the fat cats can get even fatter.

[Renew Deal]

30. The package as a whole is a second stimulus

Even Krugman says that.

[MadHound]

32. There is a small, small stimulative effect in tax cuts and tax credits, very small

Titular would probably be the best description.

If we are going to run up our debt, then it is incumbent on us to get the most bang out of our stimulative buck, and tax cuts, tax credits simply aren't it.

So Krugman is calling it a stimulus, that's nice. But in reality we're adding a trillion to our debt load and getting very, very little out of it.

Meanwhile, because of our massive debt, Moody's is thinking about downgrading our credit rating, Russia and China are going away from the dollar as their currency of bilateral exchange, oil exporting countries are switching to a basketful of currencies to take the place of the petrodollar, which is one of the reasons we're seeing gas prices rise. These are the warning signs that our debt is going to shortly come crashing down about our ears. Apparently we're not going to heed those warnings until it is a crisis, and in that crisis we'll cut spending on social programs and the like. Is that what you want? Will those few measly tax dollars that you get back be worth the further collapse of our economy?

[whosinpower]

38. They are too busy enjoying the victories

And do not want to hear the thunder storms rising Madhound....but you are absolutely correct.

Even worse in the longer term is that for every dollar that the government borrows - is a dollar lost to raise investment capital to fund new developments, business, etc. It is a double whammy that will grind the so called recovery to a halt - if businesses cannot borrow - because government sucked it all up. That means very little new hiring.

If government has to do this - and I think stimulus IS needed, it should weigh all the scenario's out that would give the economy the best long term stable growth.....perhaps a national jobs program. Give the American worker a chance and he will provide that boost to the GDP BY HIS LABOUR....not by a short term feel good payroll tax holiday.

The republicans have and continue to control the parameters of stimulus - it is tax cuts or nothing. Shot the wad, so to speak - so multimillionaires could get their 70 000 tax break, or a million dollar break on estate tax....but we got DADT, and START, and the 911 responders bill.

At the end of the day - Bill Clinton said it best - IT IS THE ECONOMY STUPID. If your flat broke - and the world shrugs off the greenback as a reserve currency.....DADT, START and the 911 bill will look....inadequate.

On the other hand, one should never underestimate what the powers that be will do to make sure the US maintains dominence....as bad as the situation is here, it is just as bad, if not worse in Europe - so the greenback does not necessarily collapse precipitously....there be wars going on that we are not even aware of, methinks. Not that I trust them for a single moment how those powers play their games.....

[golfguru]

4. yay...can't wait to cash the check

I will soon get from the government.

[Cirque du So-What]

13. The check will be from your employer - not the government

and it won't be significantly lighter, as it would be if the tax cuts had been allowed to expire. Personally, I'm glad my taxes won't be going up on January 1, 2011, and although I'm incensed that the top earners will continue to benefit, I'm not going to spite millions of others just to 'punish' the rich.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kenfrequed]

26. Punishment?

This is about actually stimulating the economy, not about giving the poor and middle class a tax break that lets them buy a new DVD player. And the continual cutting of taxes without reason and in spite (or because) of economic downturn as a solution to these problems is the very essence of supply-side economics.

[Cirque du So-What]

29. I don't support tax cuts for the middle class and poor in perpetuity

but I also don't believe this is the most opportune time to allow the tax cuts to expire. It's all academic now anyway; for the record, I supported allowing the tax cuts to expire for the wealthy. It didn't go down like that, so I work toward progressive taxation next time around.

I swear, these accusations of being a 'supply-sider' are growing fucking tedious! Show me where ANY bona fide supply-sider supports progressive taxation or STFU already!

[kenfrequed]

44. Uhm

This bill wasn't progressive taxation. That would be exhibit 1. It isn't even in the same ballpark as progressive taxation. If that is the limit of your argument then you don't have one. (and chill it with the STFU's, they sort of are the opposite of discussion)

I am not strictly calling you a supply sider, but I am saying this bill certainly seems to subscribe to the spirit of supply side economics.

[apocalypsehow]

11. Kick, Rec. n/t.

[kenfrequed]

21. DADT was the victory

The taxcut was a rout. We compromised early and often and the republicans didn't pay a political price for cutting off people that had lost their jobs.


But again, DADT was the victory, as well as the treaty.

[MadHound]

34. Yep, you've got that right

The sad thing is, if Obama and the Dems had put up a fight instead of that preemptive cave, we could have had DADT repeal, UI extension and the START treaty, without giving up tax cuts for the rich.

[babylonsister]

46. I'm VERY pleased!! Thanks for all you do, RBInMaine!

Happy Holidays! :hug: