Remember, the Dow was at six thousand 4 years ago.

...Obama has a mandate to raise taxes on the rich.

I think some of you guys are forgetting that john boehner controls the house.

john boehner has already said the but tax cuts will not expire i guess we're gonna see who budges first.

and the Democrats are willing to bludgeon the GOP with it.

Remember, all bill for raising revenue must originate in the house. However, that just doesn't matter here. The Bush tax cuts were never made permenant.

If Boehner wants to try to extend them, it's dead in the water in the Senate. At that point, all the Dems have to do is run out the clock, and the rich get a big tax increase.

Then all the Dems have to do is offer tax cuts for the middle class and just let the GOP vote for it, or vote against it.

If the Bush tax cuts expire they will expire for the middle class/poor Obama will not allow that to happen.

John Boehner won't accept any deal unless all the tax cuts are accepted including the 1%. So like 2010 someone will have to cave and you can bet your ass john boehner will not cave.

With that said obama will have to extend the bush tax cuts to keep from raises taxes on the poor. I think john boehner will find a way to outsmart the president we shall see

The fiscal cliff just got steeper


Obama's re-election portends a big fight over the national debt and lots of volatility in financial markets.
By Rick Newman
There's less uncertainty on the political landscape. But there's now more to worry about.

For a short while, Wall Street seemed to be fantasizing about a strong Republican showing in the 2012 elections, which would have brought single-party control to a notoriously fractious and dysfunctional government in Washington, D.C. That's one explanation for why the stock market had a banner day as voters were heading to the polls, rising by nearly 1 percent on a day when there was little tangible news to justify the gain.

But after a seemingly endless campaign and $6 billion worth of political spending, Americans voted to reelect President Obama, keep Congress more or less the way it's been, and continue the divided government that's been in place for the last two years. Many analysts considered that a worst-cast scenario in terms of resolving the "fiscal cliff," the huge set of tax hikes and spending cuts set to go into effect in 2013 if Washington doesn't come up with a better plan.

Since averting the cliff would require some kind of compromise between Democrats who control the White House and Senate, and Republicans who control the House of Representatives, a continuation of the status quo suggests that the same spiteful partisan squabbling that already dominates Washington will suffuse negotiations over cutting the deficit and starting to pay down the $16 trillion national debt.

"A status quo outcome will be viewed as a disappointment, and markets may sell off somewhat in the short run," wrote David Joy, chief market strategist for Ameriprise Financial, in a brief analysis of the election's consequences. "It will be viewed as an outcome which offers the prospect for continued partisan bickering on a budget deal, and which increases the likelihood of brinksmanship on the fiscal cliff."

Many analysts assumed that a Republican sweep, including control of both houses of Congress, would have raised the likelihood of a deal to rescind most or all of the tax increases scheduled to go into effect in 2013—which amount to about $545 billion. But Obama wants to raise taxes on the wealthy, which Republicans have said they won't tolerate.

That portends a nasty standoff similar to the meltdown that occurred when the U.S. borrowing limit needed to be raised in the summer of 2011, and bitter partisan wrangling went till the very last second. The borrowing limit did get raised, but the needless 11th-hour drama—plus the collapse of a broader deal to corral the mushrooming national debt—led to the first-ever downgrade in the U.S. credit rating. Over the next month, the stock market fell by seven percent.

So it's little wonder that Wall Street expects more of the same when an even bigger set of deadlines hits at the end of the year. "In a scenario in which the political makeup inside the beltway is largely unchanged from last summer, we expect an intense battle," investment bank UBS advised clients in a research note ahead of the election.


There are still plenty of ways that a divided Washington could steer clear of the cliff and spare the economy another unneeded shock. President Obama, who hasn't staked out a strong stance on deficit reduction, could grant House Republicans a few of their priorities—which mostly involve spending cuts—in order to reach a compromise. Chastened Republicans might show a stronger inclination to solve problems rather than scoring political points. Business leaders, who have been heavily lobbying for a solution, might finally bang some sense into the politicians.

But none of that will happen for a while, if it happens at all. In the meantime, brace for a few weeks that may be the bumpiest of the year so far. The election is over, but the fighting probably isn't.
..........................................................................................................................

Now of course Obamabots are going to point to a small sliver of the current Congress and put ALL THE BLAME on them for a $16,000,000,000,000 debt because they refuse to raise taxes on the millionaires making over $250,000.

So, show your math. Show me how THAT solves the problem.

http://theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=199468&boardID=39&page=1

Problem solved.

and hopefully go the way of the dinosaur.

Extinction is around the corner.

Talk about seeing the writing on the wall.

others...well, you're loss.

Treasury Quietly Warns: 'Expect Debt Limit to Be Reached Near End of 2012'

By Terence P. Jeffrey

November 6, 2012

U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

(CNSNews.com) - The U.S. Treasury quietly warned at the end of a statement issued last Wednesday that it expects the federal government to hit its legal debt limit before the end of this year--which means before the new Congress is seated--and that "extraordinary measures" will be needed before then to keep the government fully funded into the early part of 2013.

On Aug. 2, 2011, President Obama signed a deal he had negotiated with congressional leaders to increase the debt limit of the federal government by $2.4 trillion. But, now, after only 15 months, almost all of that additional borrowing authority has been exhausted.

Although Treasury revealed in its statement on Wednesday that it was likely to hit the debt limit by the end of the year, Treasury Secretary Geithner failed to respond to a letter that Senate Finance Ranking Member Orrin Hatch and Senate Budget Ranking Member Jeff Sessions sent to him on Oct. 15 demanding that he notify them by Nov. 1 what he believes to be the exact date Treasury will hit the debt limit and the date he expects to begin using "extraordinary measures" to avoid it.

"Treasury continues to expect the debt limit to be reached near the end of 2012," says the tenth paragraph of the "Quarterly Refunding Statement" put out by Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Markets Matthew Rutherford.

"However, Treasury has the authority to take certain extraordinary measures to give Congress more time to act to ensure we are able to meet the legal obligations of the United States of America," said the statement. "We continue to expect that these extraordinary measures would provide sufficient 'headroom' under the debt limit to allow the government to continue to meet its obligations until early in 2013."

Prior to the release of this statement, Sen. Hatch and Sen. Sessions sent Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner a letter asking him specific questions about the approaching debt limit and the administration's plans for dealing with it. Hatch's and Sessions's questions included these two: 1) "What is Treasury’s forecast of the date upon which Treasury will find it necessary to use extraordinary measures to manage to keep federal debt at or below the statutory debt limit?" 2) "What is Treasury’s forecast of the date upon which the U.S. government will reach the statutory debt limit given use and exhaustion of these extraordinary measures?"

The senators gave Geithner a "hard deadline" of Nov. 1 for providing an initial response to these questions. Julia Lawless, spokesperson for the Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee, confirmed that as of Nov. 6 the committee had received no response from the Treasury secretary.

As of Oct. 31, according to the Daily Treasury Statement (DTS), the portion of the federal debt subject to the legal limit was $16,222,235,000,000--just $171.765 billion below the $16,394,000,000 debt limit.

In October alone, according to the DTS, the debt subject to the limit increased by $195.214 billion.

CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like NPR. CNSNews.com is not funded by the government like PBS.

CNSNews.com relies on individuals like you to help us report the news the liberal media distort and ignore. Please make a tax-deductible gift to CNSNews.com today. Your continued support will ensure that CNSNews.com is here reporting THE TRUTH, for a long time to come. It's fast, easy and secure.



Your Generous Gift

You're still hundreds of billions short.

Show me Obama's plan.

-- Modified on 11/7/2012 9:20:48 AM

but i understand that's all you've got.

these morons think that's the panacea.

but it makes for good campaign slogans.

now that the rubber start hitting the road the markets are reacting.

The question isn't Obama's plan vs. some other guy's plan. The question is what is Obama going to do with tax reform.

Obama has said that we're going back to Clinton era tax levels for the rich. So it's going to 39.6%. I'd wager we're gonna see a capital gains tax increase as well.

And if the GOP refuses to agree, then they get automatic cuts in defense.

it will demonstrate to the rich that they own our political system like they thought they did.

But it will have a big added bonus. It will improve the economy.

Not by much, mind you. We're talking about top marginal rates going from 35% to 39.6%. But it will mean that the gov't will be getting more money and the rich will be getting less money. The gov't will be recirculating that wealth back into the economy, instead of just letting the rich hold onto it.

This will increase GDP, and lower unemployment. Just as it always has.

If Obama managed to get rid of the Reagan tax cuts and bring the top marginal rates back up to 70%, then shit. We'd start paying down the debt, and we could quadruple economic growth.

...like the GOP preaches  & go back to the tax levels then, & rebuild/maintain the infra structure that Eisenhower built....good job creators too for architects, engineers & contractors, suppliers, etc.......I want my country back!

30 years down the road, and the Reagan tax cuts are still in place, and we have a 16 trillion dollar debt.

The solution is simple. Tax. The. Rich.

Gator you forget,  that was right after WWII and everyone was feeling prosperous.  People were spending because the war was over,  Levittown was a boom and the good citizens of America were spending on all kinds of new found consumer products,

It was also 40 years into "the economic cycle" which, in macroeconomics is midway through the 80 year cycle which  has been a part of the "ebb and flow"  of economies for centuries.

.......Nothing focuses the minds of these idiotic politicians, more than a dramatic stock market drop. Expect this to continue until the fiscal cliff crisis is fully addressed by both sides. Think about this, after $6 billion spent running the most expensive election in history. What has been achieved? Nothing except the status quo!

That's right willy, the campaign is over. And yet again you obama voters put him in office because you said he has the right solutions.

So, after the tax hikes, what is he going to do to fill the REST of the hole?
BTW, watch this and get back to me:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54jr3Ceu894

Only you don't have to bailout the weather when it fucks up.

I won't sit here and say the deficit isn't a serious indicator.

However, one must understand the deficit as a function of the contraction of the GDP.

In short we need to get the economy rolling along, but that isn't something we can do alone. Folks need to understand the ramifications of globalization and because of it how no single nation can anymore dictate their financial solvency.

.........and the Republicans who signed that stupid "no tax increase" pledge can then negotiate a lower rate without breaking that pledge.  FYI the Bush tax cuts on a relative basis are much larger for the top 10 percenters than for everyone else.

and recieving transfer payments now that the gravy train is over.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total_spending_1950USbn

an alledged balance budget in the late 90s?

your anti-reagan mantra just does'nt wash.