CNN: Aides; 'Super Committee' likely to announce failure to reach debt deal.

'Super Committee' likely to announce failure to reach debt deal.

I'm shocked! :lamo

RadicalModerate said:

A weekend of talks among members of the congressional committee charged with coming up with $1.2 trillion in budget cuts appeared to produce no last-minute compromise ahead of Monday's practical deadline.Democratic and Republican aides told CNN on Sunday that discussions had turned to how to announce the failure to reach a deal.A senior Democratic aide said talks are focused on a Monday announcement.Another senior Democratic source said, "No decisions or agreement has been reached concerning any announcement or how this will end. But, yes, the likely outcome is no agreement will be reached."​

Click to expand...

If I worked for a company and was told to put together a focus group and put together some money saving ideas, and came back with nothing at all! I'd be fired. Democrats: We're not agreeing to anything until you agree to raise taxes. Republicans: We're not agreeing to raise taxes.

Fire 'em all.

'Course I'm pretty sure this has everything to do with next year's election. Nobody wants to do anything that might blow up in their face. So they don't do anything. We've got exactly what we deserve, folks: Village Idiots.

I have said this before and I will continue to bring it up since it fits perfectly. I used to teach history out of a textbook that had a chapter titled THE FAILURE OF THE POLITICIANS. It was about the era of the 1850's and the build up to the Civil War. The nation was then split geographically and economically and even morally and ethically. Those divisions caused both sides to dig in their heels more and more with each arising crisis and each passing year until we know what the resolution was.

More and more I feel that this is a parallel era. The ideological polarization of the parties is at its worst I have seen in my life time - and I am 62 and have been following politics since the sixth grade and the JFK election.
Both parties have very very different views about government, the role it plays in our lives, taxation and class and income distribution problems.

Until this ideological true believer mentality wanes and the practical pragmatists take over, we are doomed.

Some in Washington slammed Standard & Poor's for singling out Washington's dysfunction in reducing the U.S. credit rating (I felt the observation was valid then and still feel that way today). This latest situation can only reinforce S&P's assessment. More worrisome, it might erode some of the relatively greater confidence Fitch and Moody's have retained in the capacity of U.S. policy makers to address the nation's long-term challenges. Unless Washington gains policy makers who are willing to compromise to find mutually beneficial solutions rather than the present group of "theologians" who merely seek to posture while rejecting meaningful compromise, the deadlock will likely persist.

haymarket said:

Until this ideological true believer mentality wanes and the practical pragmatists take over, we are doomed.

Click to expand...

I believe this is a key point. Washington remains entrenched in a posture that largely treats the nation's long-term fiscal challenges as a philosophical debate. Instead, the latitude for action on Washington's terms is diminishing and, once market confidence erodes, that flexibility will dissipate. The decision to hold fast to ideological lines in the sand is, regardless of the protests of those involved, a decision to do nothing. Unfortunately, doing nothing is not a beneficial policy choice.

Waiting for the 2012 election with the hope that the outcome would break the deadlock is also not an optimal choice. The public might well support candidates who promise the least pain so to speak. Hence, there is no guarantee that the election will create a more favorable landscape for policy making.

In the end, the longer the nation's policy makers wait, the shorter the transition period will be and the more painful the reforms will have to be. That Europe remains the focus of debt challenges at present does not mean that such challenges won't ultimately cross the Atlantic and begin to manifest themselves in the U.S. Today's leaders might believe the decision to raise taxes (largely Republicans) and reform benefits (largely Democrats) to some degree are too risky to embrace. Those risks will likely prove very modest should market confidence in the U.S. deteriorate. Then, immediate, far-reaching, and much more painful decisions would be required to stabilize the situation.

"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissention, which in different ages & countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders & miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security & repose in the absolute power of an Individual: and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty." — George Washington, September 19, 1796

It's up to the People now to do their job and protest for government change. The government has proven itself useless.

MaggieD said:

If I worked for a company and was told to put together a focus group and put together some money saving ideas, and came back with nothing at all! I'd be fired. Democrats: We're not agreeing to anything until you agree to raise taxes. Republicans: We're not agreeing to raise taxes.

Fire 'em all.

'Course I'm pretty sure this has everything to do with next year's election. Nobody wants to do anything that might blow up in their face. So they don't do anything. We've got exactly what we deserve, folks: Village Idiots.

Click to expand...

Not addressing this may well be doing something that will blow up in their faces.

I predict that 2012 will see one of the largest replacements of long-time senators and representatives seen in recent times. Only congressmen who have tried to work together need to stay and those elected to replace them need to be committed first and foremost to actually getting things done instead of holding the party line.

I had some hope by only using a 8 of our elected leaders we could get something done. Unfortunately those 8 are party representatives. We would have gotten the same result with the entire congress. It is so hard to have faith in them to do anything for the people of this nation. My protest will happen November 6, 2012 when I don't vote for any incumbents.

I love haymarket's point and it is appropriate that it came from a History teacher. "Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it." - Georges Santayana

MaggieD said:

If I worked for a company and was told to put together a focus group and put together some money saving ideas, and came back with nothing at all! I'd be fired. Democrats: We're not agreeing to anything until you agree to raise taxes. Republicans: We're not agreeing to raise taxes.

Fire 'em all.

'Course I'm pretty sure this has everything to do with next year's election. Nobody wants to do anything that might blow up in their face. So they don't do anything. We've got exactly what we deserve, folks: Village Idiots.

Click to expand...

So we'll just replace them with more people who don't agree. Great.

Your post seems to reveal your own bias too - you say the committee was supposed to give "money-saving ideas" but it was deficit-reduction ideas, which could include new revenue. Would you be willing to compromise on that? If not, you're just as guilty.

RadicalModerate said:

'Super Committee' likely to announce failure to reach debt deal.

A weekend of talks among members of the congressional committee charged with coming up with $1.2 trillion in budget cuts appeared to produce no last-minute compromise ahead of Monday's practical deadline.Democratic and Republican aides told CNN on Sunday that discussions had turned to how to announce the failure to reach a deal.A senior Democratic aide said talks are focused on a Monday announcement.Another senior Democratic source said, "No decisions or agreement has been reached concerning any announcement or how this will end. But, yes, the likely outcome is no agreement will be reached."​

Click to expand...

At what point do we just get to start piking heads?

I agree wholeheartedly with Haymarket; the polarization in this country is a huge problem. I think a lot of it is attributable to the rise of hyperpartisan media outlets that intentionally preach a skewed, radical philosophy and simultaneously seek to undermine the credibility of less biased voices (a/k/a the "lamestream" media). I think political gerrymandering is also a big problem that tends to create a more polarized Congress. The result is that we are sending people to Washington who are seriously disinclined to cooperate, notwithstanding the fact that the vast majority of Americans want more cooperation in Washington.

I don't know how we fix it.

Can my state secede from the union?

I said this before and I still believe it. This is the best possible outcome. No agreement and simply allow the automatic triggers kick in.

No hanky panky like they were trying to do with farm subsidies.

Did anyone honestly suspect that anything other than this would happen?

AdamT said:

I agree wholeheartedly with Haymarket; the polarization in this country is a huge problem. I think a lot of it is attributable to the rise of hyperpartisan media outlets that intentionally preach a skewed, radical philosophy and simultaneously seek to undermine the credibility of less biased voices (a/k/a the "lamestream" media). I think political gerrymandering is also a big problem that tends to create a more polarized Congress. The result is that we are sending people to Washington who are seriously disinclined to cooperate, notwithstanding the fact that the vast majority of Americans want more cooperation in Washington.

I don't know how we fix it.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone does... me included. The really frightening prospect is that the other time this type of polarization happened, it took a civil war to resolve and then that was the utter triumph of one side decimating the other side and the losers had to accept anything that was demanded of them. Consider what the southern states accepted during Reconstruction and ask if they would have accepted it before the Civil war to avert that tragic loss of life. The answer is probably HELL NO WE WILL DIE FIRST. And many got that wish.

Look, I lay my cards on the table. I am a Democrat and work for an elected Democrat. I have provided political advice to other Democrats in the past in campaigns. But I would accept our sacred cows being put on the bargaining table if the Republicans put there sacred cows on that same table. I would accept a cut dollar for dollar with every dollar of tax increase they want. I would even agree to have a majority of it set aside for debt reduction.

haymarket said:

Look, I lay my cards on the table. I am a Democrat and work for an elected Democrat. I have provided political advice to other Democrats in the past in campaigns. But I would accept our sacred cows being put on the bargaining table if the Republicans put there sacred cows on that same table. I would accept a cut dollar for dollar with every dollar of tax increase they want. I would even agree to have a majority of it set aside for debt reduction.

Click to expand...

I think that most Democrats would agree with you. Democrats are not the problem here.

What a mess this truly is?? Our financial troubles should transend hyper partisan quibbling, but alas, they appear as steadfast as ever?? I really don't know what to make of our system of government anymore? Why anyone would oppose a balanced budget amendment is anyone's guess in the first place? OUr problem is that in all branches of government the people making the rules, and empowered to change the rules are the ones causing all the problems? We can't even go to the SCOTUS because they too are equally divided?? How else (And I ask this in all seriousness) can the American people dispose of an ineffective government without the use of force? Does anyone know who we can turn to? The only solution, legally is no solution. Did our founding Father's anticipate this much division? And if so, why didn't they put in a provision whereby we can evict all of them?

Term limits, no more lobbying, anonymous randomly selected commitees, no cronyism.. The whole damn situation is corrupts as the day is long, and we are to suffer through it..


Tim-

Double like!!

Hicup said:

What a mess this truly is?? Our financial troubles should transend hyper partisan quibbling, but alas, they appear as steadfast as ever?? I really don't know what to make of our system of government anymore? Why anyone would oppose a balanced budget amendment is anyone's guess in the first place? OUr problem is that in all branches of government the people making the rules, and empowered to change the rules are the ones causing all the problems? We can't even go to the SCOTUS because they too are equally divided?? How else (And I ask this in all seriousness) can the American people dispose of an ineffective government without the use of force? Does anyone know who we can turn to? The only solution, legally is no solution. Did our founding Father's anticipate this much division? And if so, why didn't they put in a provision whereby we can evict all of them?

Term limits, no more lobbying, anonymous randomly selected commitees, no cronyism.. The whole damn situation is corrupts as the day is long, and we are to suffer through it..


Tim-

Click to expand...

I like this quote:

“We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much.” - Ronald Reagan

Click to expand...

Too bad the Stupid Committee never read it.

MaggieD said:

Double like!!



I like this quote:



Too bad the Stupid Committee never read it.

Click to expand...

And then Reagan realized that he cut taxes too much, and so raised them 11 times in order to curb the exploding deficits that he created, and that we're still paying interest on.

It is blindingly, stupefyingly, confoundingly obvious that we have to both cut spending and raise revenue.

misterman said:

So we'll just replace them with more people who don't agree. Great.

Your post seems to reveal your own bias too - you say the committee was supposed to give "money-saving ideas" but it was deficit-reduction ideas, which could include new revenue. Would you be willing to compromise on that? If not, you're just as guilty.

Click to expand...

Misterman, (with a Kathy Bates inflection) where did I say anything that revealed bias?? I called them all Village Idiots. What? You like Asshats better? A group of supposedly our brightest and best are put into a room and asked to come up with something....anything. And they're coming up with nothing?? I'd ROFL if it weren't so damn sad.

Any partisanship you see in my post is coming from your 'magination, Mister.

AdamT said:

And then Reagan realized that he cut taxes too much, and so raised them 11 times in order to curb the exploding deficits that he created, and that we're still paying interest on.

It is blindingly, stupefyingly, confoundingly obvious that we have to both cut spending and raise revenue.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry. I didn't know the President could raise taxes. So what's Obama waiting for? :rofl

The BBC article on this sans the political slant of most US media. They spell out exactly what happened.
BBC News - 'Super-committee' on brink of US deficit failure

Why don't they just propose something? I mean, seriously, just meet halfway in the middle. This proposal isn't going to become law automatically, it still has to be voted on by both houses. It's seriously ridiculous that absolutely NOTHING is going to come out of these talks.