Typical,

Dem's don't want to cut spending. Tax and spend, even when you are broke.....

Lets jump off the cliff. I don't see any other way to get the two parties to get serious about the negotiations. Raising the tax rates on those who make $450K will not bring in enough revenue. It will have to be more like raising the taxes on those who make over $100K. Sorry folks, but we all made this mess and we will all have to suffer in fixing it. The tax rates have been too low for too long. And to the Dems, spending cuts will have to be made. So both parties are at fault. Just my humble opinion. Why on earth did we stay with status quo (in the House and Senate) and expect different results? That, my friends, is the definition of insanity.

The last 4 years of the Clinton Administration Federal spending was just over 7 Trillion Dollars. The budget was balanced. Since then the U.S. citizenry has elected two administrations twice each that have shown no interest in controlling Federal spending (Bush over 20 Trillion in 8 years and Obama just under 15 Trillion in 4 years). The American people have decided they want BIG government and everyone will have to pay if we are to ever balance a budget again. The taxes on the "rich" they are talking about is around 1 Trillion dollars over 10 years. Our spending for the last FOUR years was 15 TRILLION. When government gets this big it can't be paid for by just the "rich".

"protecting the long-term jobless with extended benefits". I've been an entrepreneur all my life. Perhaps early in my career I may have been eligible, but, no one would have considered firing me or layoffs at that time in the 70s. When I needed help, I certainly was not eligible for benefits of any kind. If I had been I might still have a retirement fund. I might have kept my house.

It is absolutely and totally unfair that these votes are being bought by these politicians. Paying them with unearned benefits is simply UNFAIR to all the hard-working people that often do not even get paid for their research and development work in pursuit of the old American Dream.

You politicians have destroyed this country. Your continued increase in the National Debt is criminal.

Lilliputians Could Have Even Smaller Lilliputians Called Lindsaygrahamians.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/12/30/1379681/lindsay-graham-i-will-destroy-americas-solvency-unless-the-social-security-retirement-age-is-raised

Lindsay Graham: I Will Destroy America’s Solvency Unless The Social Security Retirement Age Is Raised

I’m not going to raise the debt ceiling unless we get serious about keeping the country from becoming Greece, saving Social Security and Medicare [sic]. So here’s what i would like: meaningful entitlement reform — not to turn Social Security into private accounts, not to take a voucher approach to Medicare — but, adjust the age for Social Security, CPI changes and means testing and look beyond the ten-year window. I cannot in good conscience raise the debt ceiling without addressing the long term debt problems of this country and I will not.

It is one thing to keep Gulliver tied in knots, but quite another to try that the larger Brobdingnag.

Lindsay Graham grows smaller and smaller every day.

Wish I could walk into my employer, demand more money and keep spending like a drunken sailor!

Raise taxes and not cut spending? Deficit higher than ever and wanting more money? Lowered credit rating?

AND Time Magazine's Man of the Year?

Kinda like giving the MVP award for biggest fumble isn't it?

"Obama has the right track including the much needed health care reform that will actually cut the deficit in the next ten years." What planet are you on?

I own a small business (that I started on my own in 2005 without "asking my parents for a business loan" as Mitt Romney would have recommended), and I paid around $25,000 in federal income taxes last year. My marginal tax rate, including both sides of payroll taxes (ie. SS, Medicare, etc.) was 41% for 2011.

Mitt Romney's? Just 14%...and this is because he pays basically 0% of his income on payroll taxes, and enjoys the "Romney Rate" reduced tax rate (just 15%) on income earned on dividends that were part of the Bush Tax Cuts.

All the cry babies ,I can't survive without the welfare of the tax cuts, ah cry me a river

Off the cliff we go,take it like a man. Losers

Haha hehe hoho

I tried getting this question answered yesterday.....I'll try again....

WHY should we give a **** what the GOP says?

Last time GOP held the Presidency for 8 years....6 of those were with 100% complete GOP control....started with roughly a $300 billion surplus and left with a $1.2 trillion deficit....left office losing 800,000 jobs per month....left office with GDP shrinking at over 9% per quarter.

Now with Democrats with the Presidency for 4 years....2 of those were with 100% complete Democratic control....started with a $1.2 trillion deficit and is now projected to have a $900 billion deficit in 2013.....has 33 straight months of job growth (6 million in that time)....GDP now growing at 3.1%.

The GOP has proven to be completely horrible regarding the economy, debts & deficits, and governing in general. Why listen to them....especially when they don't propose any sort of a plan?

If you run a business and you make money you don't care about this crap,,R

The gop needs to be desolved

The GOP wants spending cuts,let's start with all their pay checks and all govt,defense ect,,,

Two questions that conservatives on this forum and at the national level NEVER answer.

1. Where was all this "fiscal responsibility" for the last 30+ years that CONSERVATIVES have pushed Supply Side/Neoliberal economics?

2. Where are the jobs that the aforementioned economic policies are supposed to be producing?

After all since President Obama was elected, we have the EXACT same policies of tax cuts, massive deregulation and running enormous deficits, being pushed by Congress and to be exact almost entirely by REPUBLICANS/CONSERVATIVES in Congress. And any other legislation to stop the aforementioned policies has been CONTINUALLY blocked by the Republicans in the Senate and the House. And in turn, revenues have continued to decline, while spending has increased.

So again simple question number two. Where are the jobs? Because jobs produce tax REVENUE that in turn if utilized correctly (see Bill Clinton) actually can reduce the deficit AND fund the government. And yes that includes the social programs that Republicans/Conservatives hate. But the overwhelming majority of Americans are in favor of.

Leave SS Medicare vets alone,,dam these people need a bullet

Step 1: Both sides need to stop name calling and finger pointing. Both sides are equally at fault for those things and both items continue to divide this country. Divided, we are falling apart. This includes both the politicians and everyone else (including those posting here). It doesn't matter how cute you think "dummycrats" or "republicons" is. It does nothing to help this country and further divides us. It also makes you look childish. So step 1 is to stop the bickering.

Step 2: With the way the economy and jobs are now as well as the increased population, we can't go back to Clinton taxes and spending. It would be great if we could, but that just isn't going to happen. Reducing taxes or spending is a razor thin road to walk because although both options can help the economy, they both can also hurt the economy. It's a dangerous road and without someone leading the country who knows what they are doing, it's bound to fail. Obama doesn't know what he's doing as he's proven time and time again. Of course, Romney wouldn't know what he was doing either. We really needed a president who knew what he or she was doing, but we weren't given a choice of having a good president. I blame both parties for that. Democrats didn't have to run Obama again. They could have put forth a quality candidate if they wanted. And Republicans could have put forth a quality candidate as well instead of Romney. So I blame both for their failure at choosing good candidates. So walking that razor sounds like a dangerous plan to me with the current leadership. We've had a few presidents who could navigate that edge, but we don't have that now. So what else is there? We need to come up with a plan to increase jobs and get everyone working who can work. The best way to do that without walking the razor is to do it without resorting to tax manipulation. Increased spending in this instance is acceptable if the results are good. Once we can get unemployment down, we need to put in place a permanent plan that can't just be changed whenever we get a new president or legislature that states that you cannot spend more than you bring in except in very specific instances. Those instances have to be laid out and have no loopholes and they have to include a requirement to have a firm plan in place to pay back the extra within a short period of time. That will keep us from going further in debt. If they want to spend more, they have to bring in more money. When we prevent spending more than we bring in, we can then work on bringing the deficit down and getting into a surplus. As long as we can't spend more than we bring in, we should be able to remain in a surplus indefinitely.

Step 3: We need to work on reducing corruption in government and in the various welfare programs. If we prevent people from using the money for things they aren't supposed to, we'll save a lot of money without having to cut any of those programs. I don't see why anyone other than those who benefit from the corruption should not support this.

Things to consider that few people seem to realize...

1) Population will continue to rise until something is done to prevent that. I don't expect anything to be done to prevent it anytime in the near future.

2) The number of jobs will continue to drop over time as efficiency increases through new technology. More and more jobs are being replaced by machines and eventually robotics will develop enough that robots will start replacing jobs as well.

1 + 2 = A dead economy. We need to be looking to the future and find a way to handle the coming problems that 1 and 2 will create. Even now, we aren't bringing in enough income from taxes because of loss of jobs. What happens in 20 or 50 years when there are fewer jobs and higher population? If we can't handle it now, how will we handle it then? Ban all efficiency improvements? That doesn't make any sense. We need to start looking into a way to survive what is coming. I'm not sure how that can be done and I don't think any one person can give you a good option. What we need is a group of people working on the problem. Do we look to a cashless society? That seems like a good option except that we have too many people who refuse to work as it is. If they aren't paid, then nothing will get done. Unless everything can be done by robots and machines, that will be a disaster. Cashless and force people to work could be an option, but people would rise up against being forced to work for a living. Especially without pay. And if there aren't many jobs, then you'd be asking only part of the population to work while the rest sits back and does nothing. That's hardly fair. You could heavily tax all businesses and let the government pay people instead of the businesses and base the pay on the job and the time at work (same pay for the same job anywhere in the country). That could work except that we can't trust the government to give us back money that it takes. You'd also have a huge outcry about everyone making the same money for the same work. It's a sticky situation and it will continue to get worse regardless what happens today regarding the so-called "cliff."

In any case, the first thing that has to happen is that we need to stop being divided. Stop bickering. Stop name calling. Stop acting childish. If you have a point, make it in a mature way. Stop placing blame (both sides are at fault). Instead, start finding a solution. A solution that both sides hate is probably the best solution because it means neither side is "winning." Work together for a change. Everyone talks about how the president or Congress is the cause of all our problems. No one is considering that the fall of society is also contributing. We need to get society back to where it used to be. That will make a huge difference even without doing anything to taxes or spending.

If spending is our problem, not taxes, then we should all be in agreement on the sequestration bill that cuts $109 billion out of the budget this year. I get so confused when we want to lower taxes for everyone especially the rich, and then talk about spend cuts as if they are the holy grail for our debt crisis solution, but oh wait we can't cut spending because people will lose jobs. How do you want to solve this crisis?

Our problem orginated when when we passed the Bush Tax cuts in the first place, coupled with rescinding "Pay-G0" legislation that required tax increases or spending cuts for each new law that increased the debt. Had we not instituted the Bush tax cuts and kept "Pay-Go" legislation our national debt would be in the $7-$9 trillion range today instead of $16 Trillion!

Time to cut all and tax all that's what will happen,,

How about attempting what the other 300,000,000 plus of us are required to do, try living within their means.

I love how liberals hate the 1%, but love their $$. If you taxed the 1% at 100%, you might get 3 weeks of gov't funding from them. Democrats need to realize growth is the only way out of this. You can't keep passing regs that require business to spend to comply and expect those business to continue to grow. You will eventually get to the point where they move operations to mexico, china, india, ect. to escape the burden. That point is already here, and now the left whine because the greedy rich had to leave the country just to stay in business. The saying is "don't bite the hand that feeds you". We chewed it off aleady, so now deal with it.

As long as our politicians call 5% spending increases, spending cuts, then most Americans will not really understand our fiscal policy. They actually think that all these cuts are true cuts, like a household budget. If the truth was out there, I think that the American people would be screaming in frustration at the democrats to get our wasteful spending under control.

The most we can expect from all these efforts will be a solution, but that solution will not be useful for any problem we have. Indeed expect a whole series of these solution in the coming seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months and years, that's great, very creative, but since they don't apply to any problems they will float above the Earth like The Moon.

I'm glad I am retired and have my pension and money saved,,,,lmao

Must suck to be most people,,,

If the Republicans are blamed for going over the fiscal cliff, as the media believes, how many people will blame them.

Let’s assume that blame falls along party lines and that it will initially mirror the 2011 elections. So, Obama received about 50.9% of the votes cast which equates to about 62.29 million votes, but, 62.29 million votes are only about 27.9% of the total eligible voters in this country, therefore, about 72.1% of the total eligible voters either voted for Romney, voted for someone other than Romney or Obama, or simply did not vote . To determine who the people would actually blame, random, representative samples from the entire eligible voting population must be secured evaluated. I doubt seriously that there would be any overwhelming support for Obama and the Democrats and that those blaming Republicans could be convinced to change their minds over the next two years.

Republicans should forget about the mediocre left wing media projections of blame, stick with their principles, educate the public and ready themselves for 2014. And by the way, as the above statistics vividly reveal, Obama’s win in the last election is far from being a mandate for anything.

Sounds like they are close. Why not phase in the sequester and call that a compromise?