|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 26, 2012 17:42:07 GMT -5
Top Negotiator for Obama's Fiscal Cliff Talks? Tim Geithner

Katie Pavlich
The White House has tapped quite a winner to lead debt/fiscal cliff negotiations on behalf of President Obama. Drum roll please.....Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner. More from the Wall Street Journal:
The White House has tapped the Treasury secretary as its lead negotiator in deficit-reduction talks with Congress, giving Mr. Geithner about a month to help cut a deal before $500 billion in tax increases and spending cuts begin in January—and before his long-planned departure from the admin
And we have this from Geithner on Nov. 19:
(CNSNews.com) - Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Friday that Congress should stop placing legal limits on the amount of money the government can borrow and effectively lift the debt limit to infinity.
(and you think these next four years aren’t going to be Hell?)
|
|
|
|
Post by jerryfmcompushaft on Nov 27, 2012 8:49:21 GMT -5
If it weren't so serious, it would be laughable....
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 27, 2012 9:37:18 GMT -5
Democrats in Congress are increasingly saying that they are willing to let the country go off the fiscal cliff if a deal cannot be reached by Jan. 1 that raises taxes on the top two percent of earners and protects entitlement programs.
The increase in the nation’s debt limit is the Republicans’ “leverage” in discussions about wider fiscal issues, House Speaker John Boehner has told President Barack Obama.
“There is a price for everything,” Boehner told the president during a Nov. 16 meeting with the president on ways to avoid the “fiscal cliff,” Politico reported on Tuesday.
But Democrats told the web site that the GOP should not expect anything in return for agreeing to an increase in the debt. “Do you really think we would come up with a $4 trillion grand bargain and then try to find another $1 trillion in cuts to offset a debt ceiling increase? I don’t think so,” one unidentified Senate aid said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Nov 28, 2012 14:42:20 GMT -5
You could take every dollar off teh 2% (ONCE) and hand it to the 98% and they would hardly tell the difference.
The 'Fiscal Cliff' and the 'Debt Ceiling' are just charades that will in due course be 'resolved', and they can then go back to spending far more than they take in, forever.
SJ
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 28, 2012 15:45:53 GMT -5
Yes, its called kicking the can down the road. Let the other guy clean it up.
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 28, 2012 16:30:10 GMT -5
President Barack Obama on Tuesday launched a public relations push for his bid to raise taxes on wealthy Americans, but U.S. lawmakers remained deadlocked over dramatic, year-end tax increases and spending cuts known as the "fiscal cliff."
At the White House, small business leaders emerged from a one-hour meeting with Obama to voice support for his goal of extending low tax rates for the middle class beyond the end of the year, while letting rates rise for wealthier taxpayers.
This is just so much show. If he were serious about the crisis he would be sitting down with Boehner and Reid rather than rubbing shoulders with some small business leaders who don’t have a vote in Congress.
I suspect he wants to play the game of chicken and stall as long as possible to see if he can’t get his way with a tax increase and more spending to follow. Be assured he will point his finger at the Republicans for the default.
Denny, compromise is not in his vocabulary.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2012 16:37:25 GMT -5
JR,
He's the only one I've EVER heard mutter the word! Grover's gonna make sure the Republicans don't say it although it does look like the ranks are falling apart a little.
Denny
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 28, 2012 17:37:07 GMT -5
I believe he said, “There will be no compromise. There will either be a tax increase on the rich or a veto”.
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 28, 2012 17:45:47 GMT -5
Guy Benson:
One of Democrats' enduring, systemic political advantages a mainstream media whose levers are overwhelmingly controlled by people who agree with them on most issues. But sometimes Democrats push their luck, and many in the press cannot help but notice. In the midst of a deluge of Republicans showing flexibility on "revenues" -- for better or worse -- Democrats have thus far been unwilling to commit to, well, much of anything at all. Compromises require real, tangible concessions from both sides, and a number of MSM stalwarts are beginning to point out that Democrats aren't doing their, ahem, fair share. The Washington Post's editorial board is urging Congressional Democrats to get serious and calling on President Obama to fill the leadership vacuum, essentially echoing what the GOP has been saying for years:
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 28, 2012 17:58:33 GMT -5
From USA Today:
Do Democrats really believe Social Security doesn't contribute to federal deficits and the national debt? They're certainly saying it a lot: "Social Security does not add one penny to our debt, not a penny," Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, insisted Sunday on ABC's This Week. During Monday's briefing at the White House, press secretary Jay Carney repeated the theme: "We should address the drivers of the deficit, and Social Security is not currently a driver of the deficit — that's an economic fact." Well, saying it's a fact doesn't make it so. Durbin, Carney and others making that claim should take a look at the president's own budget to see what's really going on. On page 465 of the budget's "Analytical Perspectives," they'll find a chart showing that Social Security ran a deficit of $48 billion last year. This year, Social Security will come up $50.7 billion short. In 2015, as more Baby Boomers retire, the gap between cash in and cash out is expected to reach $86.6 billion. Need a second source? In a report released last month, the Congressional Budget Office said Social Security benefits began exceeding payroll tax revenue in 2010, and without changes, the program will never get back into balance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir John on Nov 28, 2012 18:36:34 GMT -5
"Social Security does not add one penny to our debt, not a penny," Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois,"
This claim depends on the state of the Social Security Trust Fund. For over 30 years it has been channeling the contributions into US Treasury Bonds as required by law, and I have not seen its balance sheet, so I do not really know what its assets, liabilities and income/expenditure is.
It would depend on the interest income from those Bonds and the pension payments paid, and With interest rates on Bonds now at about 2% (6% a couple or three years ago) I would wonder at the above situation.
All Trust Fund Bonds maturing now are 'rolled over' into new Bonds at the lower rate, so the problem will get rapidly worse in the years ahead and THAT will generate the charge against the USG to cough up the difference (with borrowed money)
JMO
SJ
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 29, 2012 12:57:42 GMT -5
>>This claim depends on the state of the Social Security Trust Fund<<
The Social Security Trust Fund is much like the tooth fairy, nonexistent.
Money was taken from SS and given to Treasury, wherein it was spent.
If, in fact, SS holds Treasury bonds, the interest payments come out of the deficit these days. I am sure our bright lads at Treasury think they can keep rolling over the “bonds” and never have to pay on the principle. (just as if the debt has vanished)
The chickens come home to roost when more and more baby boomers retire and Treasury has to cough up the money. (Actually, Treasury does not cough up the money, the money will come from the taxpayer).
|
|
|
|
Post by boxcar on Nov 29, 2012 13:29:14 GMT -5
Heard o the street
Cut through the fog, and here’s what to expect: Taxes will go up just shy of $1.2 trillion — the middle ground of what President Barack Obama wants and what Republicans say they could stomach. Entitlement programs, mainly Medicare, will be cut by no less than $400 billion — and perhaps a lot more, to get Republicans to swallow those tax hikes. There will be at least $1.2 trillion in spending cuts and “war savings.” And any final deal will come not by a group effort but in a private deal between two men: Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).
|
|
|
|
Post by jerryfmcompushaft on Nov 29, 2012 14:50:43 GMT -5
See my thread on Socail security COLA... Just the beginniing....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2012 15:43:13 GMT -5
Heard o the street Cut through the fog, and here’s what to expect: Taxes will go up just shy of $1.2 trillion — the middle ground of what President Barack Obama wants and what Republicans say they could stomach. Entitlement programs, mainly Medicare, will be cut by no less than $400 billion — and perhaps a lot more, to get Republicans to swallow those tax hikes. There will be at least $1.2 trillion in spending cuts and “war savings.” And any final deal will come not by a group effort but in a private deal between two men: Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). I won't ask if you like this, but can you swallow it? |
|
