Eugene Robinson: Approve the lousy deal

[bigtree]

Thursday, December 9, 2010; 8:00 PM

Approve the lousy deal.

It pains me to write those words, because the agreement President Obama negotiated with Republicans on tax cuts is really quite awful. I know that some progressives have come to see the package as a cleverly disguised "second stimulus," but they're just rationalizing. The fact is that nobody would start from scratch and design an economic boost offering so little bang for so many bucks.

. . . congressional Democrats have no real choice but to hold their noses, approve the thing and live to fight another day. The opportunity to shape a better deal - one without those unnecessary, unfair and supremely galling tax cuts for households making more than $250,000 a year - is long gone.

As a practical matter, I don't see how Democrats could possibly think they have leverage to exact concessions before the end of the year. Republicans can simply wait them out, knowing that Democrats will be in a much weaker position when the new Congress convenes in January.

. . . as much as I sympathize with the progressives who are ready to man the barricades, let's be real. Killing the deal now would mean a middle-class tax increase, no extended unemployment benefits and no payroll tax holiday. Voters would surely feel they had been robbed - and Democrats, perhaps unfairly, would get the blame.


read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/09/AR2010120904474_pf.html

[aquart]

1. No.

[bushisanidiot]

38. So, cut the baby in half, King Solomon?

just for the sake of being right?

[aquart]

44. I didn't say "half." I said "No."

If you think giving in to terrorists will leave you with one whole baby instead of thousands of dead ones, go for it. But you get to dig the graves.

[bushisanidiot]

45. And the lower and middle class tax payers will thank us by voting

in more tea baggers in 2012.

brilliant plan.

[aquart]

46. They surely will if this plan goes through.

Nobody votes for spaghetti unless the question is "What's for dinner on a really small budget?"

Obama is cooked spaghetti. And so is the Congress that supports him.

[ingac70]

2. Fuck no.

This whole thing is a backdoor to fuck the country further and to mess up Social Security.

[AlinPA]

3. This says it all:

"As a practical matter, I don't see how Democrats could possibly think they have leverage to exact concessions before the end of the year. Republicans can simply wait them out, knowing that Democrats will be in a much weaker position when the new Congress convenes in January."

[dkf]

5. They don't get it.

[dkf]

4. It's only getting worse people.

Just think if they decide they need permanent extensions for the rich or no unemployment extensions ever.

[TBF]

17. Nice Bush-like scare tactics. nt

[bigtree]

25. opinions are 'tactics'

right?

[robinlynne]

6. payroll tax holiday really means defunding social security. let's call it what it is.

tax increase really means going back to NORMAL.

[laughingliberal]

12. +1000 nt

[bullwinkle428]

7. What an utterly ringing endorsement!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Still playing the "keeping the powder dry for another day" song we've been so accustomed to.

The battle cry of the defeated.

[Toucano]

16. God I hate that song...is it sung by Celine Dion?

I hate her, too.


:evilgrin:

[chimpymustgo]

9. Fuck no. Then the terrorists win.

[bushisanidiot]

39. So, let them shoot the hostage so they won't win?

does anyone give two sh*ts about he hostage??

[LinkUP]

10. What?

Cant imagine why they wouldnt fight this till the end of their terms, I really hope they do.

[laughingliberal]

11. Yeah. Someone else who'll do OK even if SS is cut. nt

[bigtree]

15. heh

. . . don't mention the tens of millions of wage earners that will be 'hurt' if they allow the benefits to expire and the government ponies up less in tax breaks and incentives. Who's looking out for them?

[laughingliberal]

22. So, it's the unemployed starve or the old starve? Nice choice.

Seeing as how I'm both, I'm pretty well screwed.

[bigtree]

28. that's no laughing matter

[laughingliberal]

30. Yeah. Tell me about it. nt

[bigtree]

33. .

[frylock]

24. couldn't help but notice that you don't mention the so-called 99ers

[bigtree]

29. no, the 99ers aren't a part of this deal

[frylock]

34. who's looking out for them?

[laughingliberal]

32. Here's a story about the Nevada 99ers. Wrenching. Over 26,000 here.

CARSON CITY, Nev.
A compromise between the White House and congressional Republicans to extend unemployment benefits won't help Nevadans nearing the end of their 99 weeks of eligibility, a state official said Tuesday.

When unemployment extensions end, a movement rises: the 99ers
Congress lets unemployment benefits expire: 'What now' and six other questions
Cindy Jones, administrator for the Nevada Employment Security Division, said the extension would only continue the 99 weeks of eligibility for another year, not extend benefits to those who have reached that threshold. Her assessment was confirmed by Nevada congressional staffers in Washington, D.C.

In Nevada, which leads the nation in joblessness, bankruptcies and foreclosures, more than 26,800 people have already exhausted their eligibility, Jones said. She did not have an immediate estimate on how many people are nearing the end of their benefits. About 109,000 people in Nevada collect unemployment.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Latest-News-Wires/2010/1207/Unemployment-benefits-Extension-won-t-help-99ers

[WillyT]

13. No

No

[Catherina]

14. No. n/t

[golddigger]

18. Hell no!

[EFerrari]

19. No.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

20. The rich are sweating bullets. They have alot to lose

Their act all cavalier and take it or leave it, it's a bluff. If Dems can just hold out there will be a more favorable deal.

Hell, they were talking about unplugging Grandpa from life support if the estate tax wasn't reinstated.

[stray cat]

21. Sweating bullets over what a minuscule tax increase they can avoid with deductions?

[Major Hogwash]

23. There won't be a more favorable deal. Reality bites.

But it isn't the millionaires that are very upset about this deal, it is the billionaires.
And there are about 300 of them living in the United States right now and they are pissed off more than you think.

The estate tax was ZERO -- now it will be 35% after 5 million.
5 lousy million, and then they have to pay taxes on their estate.

Representative Wiener said yesterday that only 35,000 people will be impacted by the estate tax, but it involves $75 billion dollars of estates, mostly securities.
That's a lot of moolah to give to the government.
But like Wiener said, they won't care by then, they'll be dead.

[bushisanidiot]

41. the rich are rich either way. they aren't sweating this. are you KIDDING?

.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

42. Maybe sweating is overstating it just a bit

but there are elements of the bill they want and those elements have to do with the estate tax.

$5,000,000 for children and family, an additional $5,000,000 for the spouse tax free, 35%
tax on everything above that. For millionaires that's $10,000,000 tax free. They know there
is no way Obama will allow these to expire in two years, so what we're really looking at is ten
years. Does anyone believe during an election year Obama is going to allow these to expire?

If we allow these to expire, as we should, we are forcing them to renegotiate. The burden is on
the new repuke congress. And this time allow congress to be involved in the process. The reason
Obama and McConnell agreed on this behind closed doors is the house would never have allowed it
and Obama knows that.

[bushisanidiot]

43. No. We aren't forcing them to renogiate. They will be in charge

and will demand the cuts for the super-wealthy are reinstated and they won't compromise. they WILL NOT give the President a victory. the repukes NEED to be able to argue, for the sake of the their tea bagging base, that the evil democrats want to raise their taxes unfairly. cooperation with the dems is exactly what the tea party has FORBID them from doing.

[inna]

26. facepalm, not you again.

[shanti]

27. f that

mess. ss is at stake.

[Luciferous]

31. No!

[myrna minx]

35. No n/t

[Little Star]

36. Nope!

[bushisanidiot]

37. I agree. We will never get the 60 votes needed after Dec. 31st to

exclude the rich from any tax decreases. Not ONE republican came over to vote for repeal of DADT, even though poll after poll clearly shows that the american public wants it defeated. Do you really think republicans will vote to lower taxes for anyone and NOT include the rich? NO, they won't!

[Individualist]

40. What a load of BS!