Fiscal Cliff, Who Will You Blame?

If the economy goes south, the Republicans WILL get the blame. If the economy improves, Obama WILL get the credit. No brainer. That is how it has been for the past 4 years. Why would anything change now??

I will make a prediction. It IS going to go south.

Think..."Transformation."

Obama said he wanted to transform America. I believe he is using reformism to make that happen. Reformism focuses on changing capitalist societies from within, through the political process and government reform. For that reason, I predict that things will get worse so that he can continue to make the transformation he so desires.

I will ruffle feathers with that, but people predicted that we would be headed towards socialism with Obama as president, the 1ST time he was elected. That made people mad back then and here we are... Government dependency is WAY up, we are one step closer to socialized medicine, taxation is about to go WAY up so we can redistribute the wealth and the list goes on. The facts speak for themselves.

Easy!
If you are conservative, the blame goes to the president. If you are liberal, the blame goes to the House.
If you are conservative, the glory/credit goes to the House. If you are liberal, it goes to the President.

Doesn't matter if there is a compromise.

The end.

_____________
Ok, not the end...

Regardless of who ends up actually getting the blame/credit, they ALL should get the blame--because it isn't about the amount of taxing. It is about the unfathomable amount of SPENDING.

Where's the Obama gets his way and the economy improves? Or the Republicans get their way and the economy declines? Why is there only no change/negative for Obama and no change/improvement for Republicans?

Is is that hard to see that raising taxes to where they were before the Bush tax cuts might actually move us towards our fiscal goals?

I blame every voting American...it's that WE THE PEOPLE that elected these people back into office....we LET them continue on the path of destruction...

When did the "fiscal cliff" start? I would say about 60 or 70 years ago - when we started spending more than we took in and kept raising the debt ceiling...Obama, in March 2006, said it was "irresponsible" and showed a "great lack of leadership" that they were there to raise the debt ceiling...it was done under Bush and Obama...and other presidents along the way....but ONLY OBAMA said it was irresponsible and showed lack of leadership....wonder what he thinks of his leadership? (or lack thereof)....

However, under Obama our credit was downgraded - that was a FIRST in American History - and he can't accept responsibility for it.

We have gone 4 years without a federal budget. I lay that at Obama's feet. His first two years were Democratically controlled congress and he STILL couldn't get a budget passed? ARE YOU KIDDING ME???

So riddle me this:

Do you REALLY think Congress is going to raise THEIR OWN TAXES??? Come on - these are the people who write their own raises and benefits (and they are EXEMPT from Obamacare!!)...do YOU REALLY think they are going to raise their own taxes? I think not.

Even if you raised the taxes to 100% on the "rich" for one year - it would not even begin to hit the debt. It would cover about 3 months of INTEREST payments and not even TOUCH the debt. Many just don't realize that...
for the 5th straight year we are running over $1TRILLION in deficit spending...

When the Bush tax cuts expire this year (after Obama extending them three times) it's going to be PAINFUL for many...and then when the Obamacare taxes start happening in 2013 - it will be even more painful...

Will there be compromise? Most likely not. Should there be? Yes. However it requires EVERYONE to buckle up...not just the poor and middle class. How about we go for a FLAT TAX???

Because some ONE always has to be blamed, right?
J. you are WAY too smart to try to make this a black and white issue!
Who is to blame?
Corrupt and incompetent politicians.
Greedy and even more corrupt corporations, unions and basically any large group with lots of money to influence the powers that be.
Americans who expect everything but don't want to pay for any of it.
I would go on but my glass of wine is waiting for me...

Congress. That's who I will blame. Raising taxes on the wealthiest won't plunge us into a recession. They don't create jobs with their mounds of "extra money" - they invest it in hedge funds and funds of funds, a lot of them overseas funds or funds that invest in overseas economies.

I know a lot of these hedge funds and funds of funds people. The money they have from all these wealthy people is not creating jobs - it really isn't (unless you count more AIG financial type suits who create things like CDS's and CMO derivatives...) Of course, these funds don't want to lose investment money, but I don't really care about what they want, LOL!

I don't mind giving Congress AND the president ALL the credit when they do what needs to be done, and that is to work in a bipartisan way to do what the American people hired them to do (and not what Grover Norquist tells them to do - we didn't elect HIM!)

There ya go - my 2 cents!

Dawn

congress, of course.
khairete
S.

Why do we always have to blame someone?

Who do I blame? I blame Wall Street and big banks. I blame out of control government spending on all sides. But I'm really not interested in blame. That gets us exactly no where.

http://rmichaels1.blogspot.com/2012/11/what-is-fiscal-cli...

"What is the Fiscal Cliff?

In order to address the government’s debt crises, Congress passed the Budget Control Act of 2011. The idea behind the legislation was to tackle our out-of-control spending. The Republicans wanted to do this exclusively by reducing expenditures (cut programs). The Democrats wanted to solve the problem by a combination of reducing expenditures and increasing revenue (raising taxes). As an incentive to compromise, the bill was laden with cuts that both sides would hate.

The two parties were unable to reach an agreement, causing the negative negotiating incentives to kick in December 31, 2012. Among the laws on the table are temporary payroll tax cuts, tax breaks for businesses, the Bush tax cuts, and the beginning of taxes related to President Obama’s health care law. In addition, spending cuts will begin to go into effect. Over 1,000 government programs - including the defense budget and Medicare are in line for "deep, automatic cuts."

Congress and the President can take several steps.
They can do nothing and let the tax increases and spending cuts go into effect. If they allow this to happen, the deficit would be cut in half.
They can cancel the scheduled tax increases and spending cuts, which would add to the deficit.
They could take a middle course that would have a more modest impact on growth and deficit reduction.
President Obama’s decisive victory on Election Day should significantly impact negotiations. Clearly, Americans are in favor of the Democrats’ balanced approach. Whether a full compromise can be reached before December 31 remains to be seen.

How does the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) fit in this discussion? According to Wikipedia, many economists believe that the debt-to-GDP ratio is one of the indicators of the health of an economy. A low debt-to-GDP ratio indicates an economy that produces a large number of goods and services and probably profits that are high enough to pay back debts. The US debt-to-GDP ratio is about 106%. The level of public debt in Japan in 2011 was 204% of GDP and in Germany was 85% of GDP. This year, Greece's level of public debt is 190% of GDP.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says that if Congress and the President do nothing and go over the fiscal cliff, the GDP will drop by 0.5 percent in 2013. That contraction of the economy will probably throw us into another recession and cause the unemployment rate to rise to 9.1 percent in the fourth quarter of 2013. After next year, by the agency’s estimates, economic growth will pick up, and the labor market will strengthen, returning output to its potential level and shrinking the unemployment rate to 5.5 percent by 2018.

Thanks to Thomas Kenny, a professional financial writer.
Posted by Bob Michaels at 11:00 AM, 11/11/2012"

I don't blame anyone specifically for our financial difficulties. Finance is too complicated for any one person or group to have caused success or failure. Unfortunately certain people and groups are the ones talked about and they get the blame or the praise.

If both sides compromise, both get praise.
If both compromise and everything gets worse, Obama will be blamed.
The buck stops with Obama.

If Romney would have won, and he came in and sliced up all the entitlements and kept wealthy tax breaks, and the economy improved: He would get credit. (for the economy, not for the inept entitlements and squalor that would result for the underlings)

If Obama offers cuts (which he has) and settles for the Republicans refusal to raise revenue through taxation of the wealthy, I'll be pissed since I voted for him to get help from BOTH SIDES. Then HE'LL be to blame for the squalor in above scenario, AND to blame if economy is still failing, because it will not improve by just cutting.

Based on taxation trends from past presidents, cuts need to be made AND TAXES INCREASED to improve economies. It has worked before.

Whoever doesn't cooperate along those lines is to blame.

Does it matter who we "blame" really?

I have gotten to the point where I am resolved to stop listening to ALL the BS on both sides. Instead I'm focused on the things I can control - i.e., getting out of debt, cutting all our expenses, and putting off big purchases. I am also focused on our health because health is the new wealth. You sure as heck don't want to be dependent in any way on the mainstream health care system if you don't have to.

Our grandparents managed to live without most of the stuff we consider "standard" today.

The new normal is going to be dramatically different from the last 30-40 years. But I'm not going to stand around wringing my hands waiting on any of our leaders to fix this mess. I'm staying within my sphere of control, and that includes cutting way down on TV and distractions like football.

JMO.

If they compromise, they all get the praise. There needs to be compromise. Everyone needs to walk away from this feeling like they didn't get everything they wanted. If they work together and it doesn't work as well as expected, at least they freaking tried.

Here's my rule of thumb:

If Im actually DOING anything, then I can complain.

If I'm sitting back not doing anything (and worse, am grossly ignorant as to the details), then I don't criticize those who are trying to.

Since I am currently in no way involved with trying to fix our country's economy, am moreover completely unwilling to spend my time doing so... I don't put my oar in. <grin> The =/= armchair quarterbacking. &/or put up or shut up philosophy.

All y'all who actually work & are educated in finance / business / economics and are doing your level besr do NOT need me telling you squat!

... Unless I don't like you. Then its all your fault. :D

There is bias in the way you asked the question.

Generally, the Ernst&Young report touted by Boehner etal is overblown. Raising those taxes won't have much of an effect on the economy.

http://factcheck.org/2012/11/facts-falling-off-the-fiscal...

What could have a large effect is letting all the cuts expire and letting some of the draconian cuts take effect. That could be problematic.

So, if the House Republicans draw a line in the sand saying that they won't let the tax cuts expire, based on the inaccurate/misleading E&Y report, I'd place the blame on their heads. If they come to their senses on that issue, yet we still don't have a compromise due to some other issue (i.e., the Dems drawing a line in the sand on spending cuts), then I'd blame the Dems.

If they do manage a compromise and the economy goes in the crapper, I might blame both (depending on what those compromises entail).

The history books will reflect one solid, indisputable fact: The executive, legislative, and judicial branches have now been in control with a ratio of 3:1.

To those who ask why it matters at all, the answer to solving any potential cliff dive that happens lies in the original question.

Cheryl - I agree this cliff started 70 years ago. But, I AM NOT TO BLAME AS A VOTING AMERICAN as I did not vote for this circus to be voted back in!

Is it possible to deal with a crisis and not be political?

I think whomever is president takes blame. It's goes with the job title. If the Commander in Cheif can take claim in killing Bin Laden then he can also be held accountable for sinking us or keeping us floating.

No matter who's to blame, it's time to buy precious metals, folks. Just look at how much they've gone up since we've gone off the gold standard....

For the general masses? Republicans will blame Democrats. Democrats will blame Republicans. Republicans will praise like. Democrats will praise Democrats. Likewise if they compromise.