PatsFanInVa

The pubbies wrote a letter with the world's vaguest framework, essentially recapping Rmoney's campaign position:

"Oh no no no it's terrible to raise rates, we'll just "close loopholes." "

Maybe it's best not to get too clever by half, and to stick to what the American people said: No smoke and mirrors, no games, raise rates on the wealthiest.

Well yeah, I see that.

However -- absent the usual pubbie shenanigans -- the deductions route can work just as well, and you can make more progress than through a rate hike at the very top.

Should the Dems have just dived in, and said,

"Okay, we'll give you what you want. We'll close the carried interest deduction, and limit all deductions to a cap of $100,000 (or for that matter, $50,000)?"

IOW - no, don't close the middle class deduction for home mortgage. Limit it to the primary residence (presently you can still write it off on a secondary home.) Otherwise, leave the breaks alone, but accept the dollar cap (not a percentage of income cap) as Rmoney suggested. Give it a ceiling of 50k+ -- in other words, at a high enough level that the median-income folks do not get hurt by it.

The guy figuring out how to get out of a $10M obligation gets that same 50K cap as the guy making 50K.

Why not take the pubbie framework, and define the missing variables?

I suppose the calculation in tax/debt debates is that whoever specifies the details is left holding the bag -- ergo, it's a trap. The Administration's floated their idea - a higher highest marginal rate. The people digested it and voted on it and approved it. They have a winning hand.

We all saw what happened in the health care debate, so I'm not so sure I want to start from the compromise position. But that's all tactics. In terms of one-man dictatorial rule, if I could just take the pubbie letter, say "Okay, and I'll define the terms," I could achieve the same goal. In terms of poker with pubbies, that's another story.

Meh, about a month until we see what's under the tree, in terms of Taxes. Probably a stopgap until the next time. We'll see.

pFnV

Tunescribe

I've lost faith in this system. It used to be that compromise for the good of the country was an assumed part of the job. Both sides are to blame, but the Repubs are the primary culprits intractably protecting the rich. I wish someone would throw a pie in Boehner's face, I'm sick of that stiff.

__________________

Beware ... The Patriot Attack Parrot!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

PatsFanInVa

This whole fiscal cliff thing, and the debt ceiling debacle that preceded it, are going to be looked at as a testimony to the value of secret shady behind-the-scenes backroom dealing. The trouble comes in when you go all bumper-sticker where the wonks should talk to the wonks and put it to bed.

PFnV

OMGWTFJUDD

Closing loopholes "should" be a priority of all govts.

I don't know what it's like in the US but here we have the ridiculous situation where companies and individuals can manipulate the system to such an extent that they, effectively, negotiate the level of tax they pay.

IllegalContact

there's not going to be any fiscal cliff......watch

1/1/13 will show up without a meaningful change in our lives......book it

__________________
“ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.

DarrylS

But it does make grand theater... more twitter followers for all, the true measure of success...

__________________
"Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.

IllegalContact

anyone who thought there's any kind of substantial difference from bush to obama to whoever is next is a fool

__________________
“ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.

PatsFanInVa

Kind of broad, bland, and off-topic there IC.

IllegalContact

Not really....

__________________
“ I think good coaches will coach with the personnel they have, and if you only have one (good) linebacker, you’re not going to play a 3–4. ”
—Hank Bullough, who installed one of the first 3–4 defenses with the New England Patriots.