Deficit Cutting Bill Passes House

About fucking time. Its probably a little harsh for senate democrats to sign off however. Hopefully the majority of the bill survives in some form or another. The balanced budget amendment is laughable but at least it has zero chance of coming to pass.

I'd much rather see cuts in medicare and social security, especially the latter. Social Security money goes to so much more than was originally intended. It has been long due for an overhaul.

OP - You confused two separate plans:

1.) The House passed the Tea Party-supported bill, which is the "cut, cap, and balance." It doesn't raise any revenues (or close any loopholes) and is completely opposed by Obama/Democrats.

2.) The Gang of Six bill has not been introduced for vote. The plan has been discussed, and it does have support from Democrats/Obama...but the Republicans will oppose it because it does include revenue increases (closing of loopholes).

Op has no idea what the hell he is talking about. The Republicans passed a $6 Trillion dollar spending cut bill with some bs rider on it requiring a balanced budget amendment. No way it passes the senate and they know it - complete showboating and time wasting on the Republicans part.

The gang of six plan is a way better plan overall. It closes a lot of different loopholes and lowers the top bracket down between 23-29%. It also cuts medicare spending and requires a slowdown in the annual increase in social security benefits. The republican plan will never pass the senate but Boehner needs to keep the tea party happy. If they actually follow through with everything in the gang of six plan then that would be a huge step forward.

do I hear a semi-optimistic conversation about politics on WSO? wow, cool. hope the plan passes...something needs to be done.

Why is this on the front page? It doesn't even have accurate information. Where did you get your knowledge? Fox News? Rush Limbaugh? The Democrats have the largest deficit reduction package on the table. It involves a tax increase, though. Guess what--that's part of the deficit equation. Revenues - costs = surplus or deficit. Unfortunately, our costs dwarf our revenues. Ergo, we have a massive budget deficit.

If we want to be serious about cutting our deficit, we need to talk about both aspects of the aforementioned equation. Closing loopholes is great. It should have been done ages ago. But a tax increase isn't a horrific idea either. Beyond a certain point, taxes inhibit 'job creators' from adding to an economy, but the argument doesn't hold across the entire continuum of possible taxation rates. If taxed at 0%, corporations DO NOT SPEND the entirety of saved tax revenues on capital expenditures or salaries. Generally, they return a rather substantial portion of those revenues to shareholders.

As such, a decrease in marginal tax rates increases savings as people reasonably expect their investments to experience outsized returns. In turn, that reduces the velocity of money in the system as consumption slows. And while we (as a society) could afford to save a bit more, we also need short-term spending to increase consumption.

Now, I'm not trying to argue that increasing taxes increases consumption. Clearly, if people and corporations have no money, they cannot spend it. My point is only that when they have loads of cash, they also don't spend it.

Even as a Libertarian, I recognize that some taxation is useful for supporting programs that would not exist without a government (due to free-rider problems)--a military, for instance. Most people argue about taxes from an extremist vantage, and that's all wrong.

We can afford to close nearly all of the loopholes in our tax code--corporate or otherwise. Special interests create loopholes. Those loopholes are net negatives for the vast majority of society. And it results in a rather unfair corporate environment, where some companies are treated as first-born sons and others as red-headed stepchildren. It actually forces a lot of companies to move their profits offshore because the US has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Those loopholes are not business-friendly at all.

And tax breaks for the rich simply don't make any sense. They are generally not job creators beyond a certain point. I make more money than 99% of all Americans. I actually get the tax breaks for which the Republicans are currently fighting, and I definitely do not create jobs with my tax breaks. Don't get me wrong, I really like my money. I don't want my taxes raised. I just don't get why the rest of you don't want my taxes raised.

With that narrative you just wrote I found it very very hard to believe you're a Libertarian.

[quote=MMBinNC]Now the real hurdle comes. Passing the House with all but 8 Republicans voting for and all but 5 Democrats voting against the newest measure is going to the senate. In my mind, there is no way that this passes the Senate. But this is yet another way to show America that Republicans are the only party willing to cut the deficit as it is needed. People like IP would be happy with the fact that this bill raises taxes on corporations (closing loopholes), the marginal rate would be REDUCED, and vast cuts to social welfare programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.

I love it. But without a Republican supermajority in the senate I think this will result in political grandstanding at its best. EVEN THOUGH OBAMA LIKES THE PLAN SOMEWHAT. He still threatens a veto. But the way things are going we will have significant deficit reductions and HOPEFULLY A BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT. Because it seems like any debt-ceiling increase will be accompanied by a constitutional amendment having to be sent to the states for a balanced budget.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Debt-hope-Obama-praises-Gang-apf-12081951…]

Dude, this is at least the fifth time this year you have made me go back to the drawing board on a post. You are killing me worse than Obama's killing capitalism.

All jokes aside, Patrick's got the right idea...there should be some positive attitudes with regards to this situation. Our politicians may suck donkey dick but the shit I have been seeing in Europe the past few months makes D.C. look like the hallmark of bureaucratic efficiency and responsibility.

I am hopeful that we have reached that tipping point where both idiotic sides of the isle (out of self preservation, naturally) are realizing that not doing something will have detrimental effects for decades to come. Who turns out to be the good guy vs. who turns out to be the bad guy doesn't really matter. Get this shit done so I can get back to calling people Socialists in peace.

Ahhh...you're right I did confuse the two bills. No need for another 1000 posts laughing that i misread the ambiguous article. I remember reading the article and thinking hmmm.. $1tn + $4th /=/ $6tn , but I decided to ignore it. Combined with the joke I deleted about how long the legislation was and I STILL didn't read it, it's not that surprising that I was wrong. I will fix the original post. The main point was to say that this is finally coming to a close and it seems no matter what we gonna see some legislation that addresses the problem.

Although I would love for a complete revamp of the system to what I like txjustin, I will accept a compromise fr now. If some Republicans can get in office we will see more deficit reduction (granted that this doesn't sate the vocal fiscal conservatives and we go back to Bush II days). Anyone who looks at politics sees that its always very, very, very, vey slow and you never get what we want. Look at Black's Median Voter Theorem never will we get an optimal outcome. If we can a least move toward my idea of perfection, it's at least in the right direction. Prior to this we've been moving backwards.

I like the gang of six plan but do wish it went further as far as cuts. I like where it gets its revenue from. Even though it's technically higher taxes, closing loopholes for corporations makes sense especially if we get so much additional revenue that we get lower top tax brackets

The balanced budget amendment is the only way that America will ever have a sustainable debt solution. 49/50 states have a balanced budget amendment, why cant the federal government? This is possibly the only comment that pissed me off, it's people like you who essentially will rely on politician to "do the right thing" and damn America. Either you have to be retarded or don't care if you think that politicians will not overspend without a balanced budget amendment. The short time horizon that politicians look at leads to more welfare, more entitlements, and more earmarks. It is FACT. I am honestly amazed that anyone with a grain of fiscal conservatism or responsibility would be opposed to it. Your argument is asinine.

The balanced budget amendment would require a 2/3rd majority to raise taxes. It would more likely result in lowering spending which would require a simple majority. The notion that the government "can" is different than it "will". They will never balance the budget outside of times like this. When else waas it balanced? Like for 3 years in our entire history. Yea. Precedent prior to Wishes.

OMG 34 years out of 300? You are SO RIGHT! That completely invalidates my argument.

The balanced budget amendment suggestion is moronic. It would likely have been circumvented to go forward with the Iraq war but might have prevented fiscal stimulus from being passed in the Fall of 2008, leading us to both a massive deficit and people's 401ks getting crushed a great deal more than they were.

The business cycle will ensure that any attempts to keep the budget balanced at all times will be a charade. The Tea Party has every intention on taking our economy back to the 1700s and they're too stupid to know it.

I do feel like the tide may be turning though. A big deal would be a major plus for the US outlook, and one can only hope that Europe gets its act together (the Greek default is a step in the right direction) so that the dollar doesn't skyrocket which is the last thing our economy needs.

You obviously have no understanding of what the Tea Party people want.

Please enlighten me then.