Stop calling it the 'Fiscal Cliff'.
- Thread starter hazlnut
- Start date
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
The reason it is called a fiscal cliff is because you are cutting spending and raising taxes at a time the economy is weak. If done all at once it could send us into a deep recession, hence the 'cliff'
That said, what you stated above is still correct. It is simply a reset to tax rates that were around in the late 90's and a reset to spending levels that aren't blatantly insane.
We should return the tax code to the Clinton era rates for everyone making over $75k per year ($125 for a household). We should return cap gains taxes to at least 20% if not 25% (or preferably tax them as ordinary income). At the same time we should cut spending back to 2006 levels, adjusted 3% per year for inflation.
It's called a fiscal cliff because people are metaphorically challenged. The thing about a cliff is that if you go off it, you immediately and irreversibly fall until you hit the ground. With the tax increases and spending cuts, nothing irreversibly bad will happen on January 1, 2013.
Also, cutting spending back to 2006 levels and adjusting for inflation (but not population growth, and aging population and weak economy) is stupid.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Dear douche bag... no one said it was irreversible. It is if those things happen without other measures being taken, that is what would happen. I know you are a douche and can't help it, but do shut the fuck up sometimes rather than simply proving over and over again that you are an insufferable prick.
What is 'stupid' is calling something stupid while not really knowing what you are talking about.
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2011/12/28-census-population-frey
You are again just being a douche bag and trying to nitpick. We are far and away at insane levels of spending. There is nothing in the 'population growth' or aging demographics that justifies anything close to what we are spending today relative to 2006. So if you want to be a douche bag and nitpick... then adjust for the anemic population growth since 2006, make it spending per capita adjusted for inflation. Adjust for the aging demographics if you think you know how. It will be far closer to the 2006 levels than the current levels.
Um, it's inherent in the term "cliff."
That's awesome. I don't know what I'm talking about because population growth was slow in the 2010 to 2011 period. We have about 14 million more people than we did in 2006. That's only the population of the three largest cities in America combined. I can't imagine that many people would require any additional resources of any kind.
Nitpick? You randomly select 2006 and pretend that whatever we spent then is good enough for today. If you want to cut spending, you should say what you want to cut and by how much. Just picking a number and pretending it should be enough is a cop out because you don't want to look like a dick for making specific cuts to important programs that people rely on.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
I can jump off a cliff with a parachute, I can decide whether or not to pull the rip cord. Again, you are just being a nitpicking douche bag. It is a description of what will happen if we do nothing. We go over. We fall. We hit bottom. How far down the bottom is depends on what we do in response. How hard we hit depends on what we do in response.
The point was for you to look at the charts. We have seen a declining growth rate for almost a decade. Also, as I stated, adjust per capita for that 14 million. That is a 5% increase in population. Adjusting spending for that is fine.
It wasn't random douche bag. It was the first full year prior to the beginning of the downturn.
Again, you are being a nitpicking douche bag. We can go into specifics on this thread of where to cut if you wish. Just ask. I am simply stating that overall spending levels are insanely high and have no reason to be based on spending from 2009... which is precisely what YOU and the left wing nuts want to do.
Spending in the last good economic year IS a good starting point for spending today. Again make the adjustments for inflation and your whopping 5% population growth. Your problem is you never want actual spending cuts, you just want cuts in the growth rate of spending.
For specifics, the first two...
1) Defense: Like most areas of government, it has an over abundance of admin. Slash defense by at least 1/3, preferably closer to 50%. Admin, many foreign bases, weapons systems the military itself says they don't need etc...
2) Medicare: Even Obama found $500b in waste here, cut it.
3) Discretionary spending cut by 10% across the board
But there is no cliff. That's the thing.
You could have just said that adjusting for population growth is appropriate. Now, if you would just agree to adjust for economic conditions and an aging population we'll be getting somewhere.
Since you enjoy calling me a nitpicking douche bag, I'll go ahead and be a nitpicking douchebag: the first full fiscal year prior to the recession was FY07.
I fail to see how government spending when unemployment is below 5% is a good level for spending when unemployment is at almost 8%, but that's just me.
Yeah, the first two are specifics but one we've already done and one we're not going to do any time soon. The third isn't a specific and is just another lame ass attempt to cut important programs that people rely on without looking like a dick.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
like the Obama re-election, we can say we're against it, but there are enough people out there in favor of it that going over the cliff is inevitable......
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
So what you are saying is that tax policy is impacting your behavior and that you would rather not pay a higher rate to help the poor?
Greedy prick
I love when big liberal talkers like yourself actually live like conservatives.
Fucking hypocrite
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Because cliffs are black?
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
They're just albino cliffs.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Yes moron, there is a cliff. Yes, we can AVOID it if we take action. But that doesn't mean the cliff isn't there.
Adjust for economic conditions? LMAO... GDP is positive. There is NO REASON for the continuation of spending at these levels. NONE.
You just want to make up one excuse after another for continuing on this path to destruction.
Sorry douche bag... as I stated, the first full year prior to the start of the downturn is what I stated. you are trying to now create yet another straw man by changing it to the technical start of a recession, which is NOT what I stated. The downturn began in 2007...as stated.
I understand completely why it is so confusing to you. You think the government should spend regardless of conditions. Spending doesn't solve problems dung. It has to make sense. Spending had it been done on infrastructure would have (and still does) made sense. Spending continuously on short term stop gap measures does nothing for the economy long term. Which is why Obama has failed so completely despite the insane spending levels you love so dearly.
So again... you parrot the standard line of crap of 'I don't think they will ever do it, therefore it is not a plan'. THAT is the fucking problem you retard.
Sorry dung, but I am not listing every single fucking line item for discretionary spending. It has nothing to do with whether people think I am a dick or not. That is simply your way of yet again dismissing any conversation on the topic. Because you don't want anything cut.
Nope. There's just no cliff at all.
Unemployment is at close to 8%. Also, too, LOL at "path to destruction." Who really says that? Do you talk like that in real life?
Well, since we're talking about government spending and government spending is calculated on a fiscal year basis and the fiscal year runs from Oct. 1 - Sept. 31 and the last full fiscal year prior to the downturn was from Oct. 1, 2006 - Sept. 31, 2007, a/k/a FY07, the appropriate baseline year for government spending would be FY07, not 2006.
You couldn't have been less responsive to my comment if you tried.
I could come up with all sorts of fantasy plans for ideal government spending as taxation levels. Anyone can do it. What matters, though, is what can and will actually happen. Pretending that a 1/3 cut in defense will happen any time soon is fantasy.
You don't have to list every single fucking line item. "Across the board" cuts are just stupid. If you want to cut stuff you should say what you want cut, by how much and why.