A Tuesday morning seminar on Where The New York Times Is Really Coming From re: the "fiscal cliff"

[WilliamPitt]

Last edited Tue Nov 27, 2012, 09:31 AM - Edit history (1)

To wit: The headline of the article below - "Efforts to Curb Social Spending Face Resistance" - suggests that Democrats' victories in the '12 election have emboldened them to not bend or compromise on social programs like SS and Medicare. A good thing, right? A really, really good thing!

Apparently not. Dig the first paragraph: "President Obama’s re-election and Democratic gains in Congress were supposed to make it easier for the party to strike a deal with Republicans to resolve the year-end fiscal crisis by providing new leverage. But they could also make it harder as empowered Democrats, including some elected on liberal platforms, resist significant changes in entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare."

So...winning makes it **more difficult** to get things done? Winning means Republicans (gasp) might not get everything they want? On "entitlement programs" that we've already paid for?

I see you, NY Times and Robert Pear. The Suck is strong with you today.

The story: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/us/politics/politics-in-play-over-safety-net-in-deficit-talks.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[WilliamPitt]

1. Up

Important.

[HughBeaumont]

2. Apparently, even a few on this board are buying into the RW scare tactics:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021888297

You know, because I ALWAYS rely on the "non-partisan" Tax Foundation (REALLY?) as a reliable and objective source.

http://www.alternet.org/economy/fiscal-cliff-scare-talk-follows-shock-doctrine-script?paging=off

At the end of the year the Bush tax cuts expire. When this happens tax rates will rise modestly to where they were when Clinton was President. Also at the end of the year budget “sequestration” occurs. This means that the various cuts Congress approved to end the debt ceiling “crisis” will begin to phase in. (Remember, the debt-ceiling “crisis” was when Republicans refused to allow the country to honor its debts, holding the economy hostage, unless they got deep budget cuts in the things We the People do for each other.)

That’s it. That’s the “crisis.” All of the people who had been hysterical about the budget deficit “crisis” are now hysterical that taxes will go up and spending will go down. Go figure. Maybe — just maybe — I shouldn’t even say it — these “serious people” weren’t … serious … when they said they were worried about the deficit. You see, the hysteria now is because tax rates at the top will go up (cutting the deficit), and because a big part of those budget cuts (cutting the deficit) is military spending. Unfortunately the sequestration also cuts important things that help a lot of people and our economy. But these cuts do not take place all at once (a “cliff”), they will be phased in over time, and the Congress can act at any time to halt any of these cuts.

The “Fiscal Cliff” is not a cliff and the language itself is intended to scare people . The name itself is designed to create panic, evoking disaster imagery of people and the economy falling off a cliff. It is the latest manufactured “crisis” and we are all supposed to be terrified and demand immediate and extreme solutions.

Again, the very people screaming loudest about deficits are the people who passed tax cut after tax cut, and military spending increase after military spending increase, and started war after war. Then these same “serious people” terrify the public, telling them that budget deficits will lead to the destruction of the country — and soon. After a decade of screaming “9/11,” “9/11,” noun verb “9/11,” they screamed “deficit, deficit, deficit.” Now they scream, “fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff, fiscal cliff.”

[daleanime]

3. same as it ever was....

[spanone]

4. since the election my 'news' programs have been dominated by the losers

had romney won by the same margin, the word 'mandate' would be tattooed on news anchors foreheads...

[1StrongBlackMan]

5. As a DUer wrote, shortly after the election (paraphrasing) ...

gop response to the election:

"Okay ... The people have widely defeated our agenda. Here our our demands."

Now it appears the media's response to the election is:

"Okay ... The people have widely rejected the gop agenda. It is time for Democrats to give in to gop demands."

Yes ... The Suck is truly strong.

[geckosfeet]

6. Well honestly, I would expect no less from the Times.

But I expect some changes to SS and Medicare -

lower the retirement age to 55
lower Medicare eligibility age to 55
remove the cap on income for SS deductions
use a fixed percentage rate deduction for all income levels for SS deductions