All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Who should give in?
12/13/2012 10:29 AM
12/14/2012 2:57 PM

Clearly both sides need to compromise to save America the shame of the cliff.

The Republicans have given ground of revenue neutral loophole elimination.

What has Obama agreed to give ground on?

12/17/2012 12:38 AM
nothing...nor should he. Elections have consequences.
12/17/2012 6:16 AM (edited)
Posted by seamar_116 on 12/17/2012 12:38:00 AM (view original):
nothing...nor should he. Elections have consequences.
He should because he's wrong about economics.

But you're right:  elections have consequences.  We ignorantly voted for higher tax rates on the rich.  Unfornately all we'll get are higher tax rates on the rich, but less share of the burden paid by the rich, if historical precedents hold.  (Which is not what we supposedly want....right?)
12/17/2012 7:39 AM
Posted by silentpadna on 12/17/2012 6:16:00 AM (view original):
Posted by seamar_116 on 12/17/2012 12:38:00 AM (view original):
nothing...nor should he. Elections have consequences.
He should because he's wrong about economics.

But you're right:  elections have consequences.  We ignorantly voted for higher tax rates on the rich.  Unfornately all we'll get are higher tax rates on the rich, but less share of the burden paid by the rich, if historical precedents hold.  (Which is not what we supposedly want....right?)
The true mark of a leader is not necessarily to do what's popular, but to do what's right.

Obama has chosen to appease those who believe that taxing the rich is the answer to the economic problems we are facing.  Much like Obamacare appeased those who felt that government mandated healthcare would be the magic silver bullet to solve the problem with healthcare in the U.S. (it won't). 
12/19/2012 4:32 PM
Posted by seamar_116 on 12/17/2012 12:38:00 AM (view original):
nothing...nor should he. Elections have consequences.
And all the Republican Congressman have a duty to uphold.

So is Obama going to compromise and fix the problem or remain entrenched in his narrow vision?
12/20/2012 10:49 AM
Obama has publically expressed his willingness to compromise.  What he has not publically stated was the caveat that compromise must be done entirely on his terms.

He's also making the negotiations all about him, ironically by insisting that the Republicans are making it all about him.

I'm seeing Boehner offering some concessions on taxes for the rich.  What has Obama offered as concessions from his side?
12/20/2012 11:43 AM
Government is out of control and out of touch with reality. From the pork that is added to every flippin bill, to taking care of the big-corp election contributers, to the greedy lobbiest, to the politicians themselves that vote for their own special entitlements, the American taxpayer is getting fleeced everytime they raise taxes on anybody, rich, middle class or poor. It has been said many times....  We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Dems and Repubs are both to blame, neither will admit it, and think it is the other party's fault.
What we need is for a 3rd party to take hold in America and I'm not suggesting the Tea Party but an entirely new party that will eliminate everything I have stated. Make each bill pass on it's own merit, no adding projects. No more campaign contributions from anyone. All election funds for campaigns comes from a small fee $10 or $20 collected from every tax paying citizen. It is divided up equally to each party. They can distribute the money to which ever candidate they want, but once it is gone, no more. Outcast the lobbiest. The politicians should get their ideas for bills and the pressure on how to vote from their constituants, not any other source. Eliminate all special entitlements for politicians. They use the same health care system, the same retirement fund(Social Security), the same everything as the American taxpayers. Every bill they pass onto the backs of the American citizens must also include them. No more than 2 terms in office total, ever. Then they go back to work like the rest of us. It is total BS what they have given themselves. It is WAY past time to take control of government and put it back into the hands of the people. We aren't suppose to be working for them, they are suppose to be working for us!
12/20/2012 6:40 PM
I appreciate that you are willing to lay it on the line and show what you stand for. I think your plan is falwed because...

1 The reason we have lobbyists is to reduce corruption. Lobbyists have to follow rules, and regular people do not.

2 How can each bill be by itself. We need to make deals to get things through. Back scratching and what not.

3 So we can only have 2 parties get money? What makes you a party. Do all partys get the same money?

4 So every individual has to go to Washington and talk to their guy? You cant pick a guy to talk for you? Or would that be a lobbyist?

5 Do you think new congressman all the time will help the littel guy ot hurt him?

6 Can I use my money to run commercials for whatever issue I want? Can IBM?
12/20/2012 9:59 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 12/20/2012 10:50:00 AM (view original):
Obama has publically expressed his willingness to compromise.  What he has not publically stated was the caveat that compromise must be done entirely on his terms.

He's also making the negotiations all about him, ironically by insisting that the Republicans are making it all about him.

I'm seeing Boehner offering some concessions on taxes for the rich.  What has Obama offered as concessions from his side?

Do a little research and you will find that Obama did indeed offer up some compromise by raising the number from income of 250k to 400k on who taxes wouldn't go up on.  Of course Boehner got ***** slapped today by his own party so who knows what is going to happen.  His political career is pretty close to DOA.  It does look like house republicans are willing to non compromise on tax increases right off the cliff.  It's all cut cut cut to them.

12/20/2012 10:07 PM
What cuts has Obama proposed?
12/20/2012 10:11 PM
To clarify: the Republicans starting point a couple of weeks ago was to reduce the gap entirely by spending cuts.  The Democrats starting point was to reduce the gap entirely by raising taxes.

The Republicans have moved a little by agreeing to some raise in taxes.  Where have the Democrats moved in terms of offering spending cuts?

As I said, Obama's idea of compromise seems to be "give me concessions" and not much else.
12/20/2012 10:48 PM
Posted by The Taint on 12/20/2012 9:59:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 12/20/2012 10:50:00 AM (view original):
Obama has publically expressed his willingness to compromise.  What he has not publically stated was the caveat that compromise must be done entirely on his terms.

He's also making the negotiations all about him, ironically by insisting that the Republicans are making it all about him.

I'm seeing Boehner offering some concessions on taxes for the rich.  What has Obama offered as concessions from his side?

Do a little research and you will find that Obama did indeed offer up some compromise by raising the number from income of 250k to 400k on who taxes wouldn't go up on.  Of course Boehner got ***** slapped today by his own party so who knows what is going to happen.  His political career is pretty close to DOA.  It does look like house republicans are willing to non compromise on tax increases right off the cliff.  It's all cut cut cut to them.

How is that a compromise?

We dont want any taxes and we do want cuts.

Obama responds with no new cuts and he will lower the amount of his increase in taxes?

That isnt really a compromise.
12/20/2012 11:21 PM (edited)
He also dropped from 1.6 trillion to 1.2 trillion in tax revenue and offered up 500 billion more in tax cuts.

Edit: Errrrrr spending cuts. Sleep time.
12/21/2012 12:25 AM
Obama is giving a minor SS issue by using the new index.

I admit that it is putting SS on the table, but it isnt much.
of 14
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Who should give in?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.