in all the BS about the fiscal "cliff". Let the damn tax cuts expire, then on Jan 2, introduce a bill cutting middle and lower class taxes. Let the Rethugs vote against that. It will hang them for a generation. I wish they'd raise the tax rates on millionaires back up to 90%. Let 'em go live in Somalia.

introduce a bill preserving the cuts for the middle and lower class taxes. THEN, let the gop vote against that. Then let the damned tax cuts expire.

This strategy places the gop in a true corner. If House republicans vote against the Senate Bill and no deal is reached, they will have to explain why they did nothing to protect the working classes ... it falls squarely, and undeniable, on their shoulders. Shoulders that the working classes will remember in 2014.

Make the Repukes take the blame for taxes rising in January.

and Democratic-leaning pundits, that are arguing that President Obama should pursue a strategy that, if the wheels fall off of the negotiations, would provide the gop with a ready-made talking point, i.e., "in his 2008 campaign, then-candidate Obama promised not to raise taxes on those making $250K or less."

Maybe they think that the gop would give him a pass on the promise; rather than, use it to deflect attention.

No ... The first rule of (highstakes) negotiation is, if possible, publically lock your opponent into a position that you can live with; then use that position as a backstop, when negotiating for more.

But maybe, my training and experience in negotiations has been all wrong ... better to appear strong with NO backstop!

Warren Buffet was on Morning Joe. He gets it so the rest of the rich understand. Why people would vote for someone who pays 14% and see W hyping off shoring assets while our infrastructure rots makes me more dedicated to see their demise.

for all that you have written and then add

Congress shall expand Medicare to all Americans.

Republic-Con-Artists have scared many retirees living off dividends that they will be effected. I would want to clarify that it's not about them. It's about the "rich" not the folks living modestly off their life savings.

Realistically, we ought to be more proactive about standing up for folks who were successful at saving for retirement. We stand up for people collecting union pensions. Someone getting $60k or more per year in pension has the equivalent of (not sure about the math exactly) over $1-2 million in retirement. Those who save a couple million should not be penalized. People should understand that these are not the rich, but just people who saved for retirement.

I am living with low interest rates so that the economy will turn the corner. I am doing my share but things will have to change in time.1mill @ 6% = $60K VS 1mil @ 1.2%=$12K. Other fixed income is paying 5% but not as safe as CD's. Come on tax those 1% and be done with it already. Lets get this train moving. I got 80% of my money out of the stock market in 5/07 and you younger folks need to be carefull. Look for big world events to work the market and don't follow the herd. Read Nate Silver's book .

about 60 miles past any developed area. By the time I retire the developers will be there, I'll see an increase on my money down, I sell, buy small, and live.

No way is the stock market or a 401k gonna see that money.

Exponential wealth should be focused on main st, and on labor. Get the machine working smoothly and with some longevity and strength.

on businesses and wealthy individuals. Do you know what the businesses did to keep from paying most of the profits over a certain amount in taxes? They gave bonuses to employees---I had a boss who said he would pay almost all the profits from December to the IRS, and would rather give that money to us.

Think about this. A profitable company would rather pay higher wages and bonuses to the workers than to the IRS. It was beneficial in many ways---employees were happier and cared more, the bosses got a good deal and so did the employees.

He gets it. Congress, especially the Republicans, apparently don't. He said so himself very recently - when those top rates were very high, he did quite well with his investments. He has advocated for minimum taxes for those earning more than $1M, and even higher for $10M. He may well have billions stashed away but he is certainly not out of touch with the majority of America.

If the ultra-rich are calling for tax increases, then why not? He did say both sides need to give concessions, and by that I imagine it would mean Republicans agreeing to rate increases, and Democrats agreeing to some tax reform that may not appeal to their base.

That was the "reasoning" for Reagan's "trickle down" and Bush's tax cuts. Richie Rich was supposed to re-invest his new-found swag in America, creating jobs. But they didn't do it; they didn't live up to their part of the bargain. Richie Rich took his swag and hid it in secret off-shore tax havens while exporting American jobs to foreign lands.

They didn't do what they said they would do. Now it's time for them to pay it all back!

Lest we forget:

I get it. It's the reverse socialism this country embraces.

Typhoid Mary wasn't famous for contracting typhoid. Lots of poor people contracted typhoid. And the country didn't worry about it as it was only the surplus population dying off. The "job creators" were safe in their mansions.

Then along came Mary with a natural immunity to typhoid. This poor housekeeper was able to spread the disease throughout those mansions killing the people who count.

Poor people's health is not just their problem. It is a problem for the wealthy as well.

----------------------

I am one of those who was theoretically untouched by the latest recession. I am making more money. My employers esteem for me remains high, possibly even higher. Even the two small businesses I own on the side have seen no downturn.

By Rightist logic I was completely untouched. But I say "theoretically" untouched because numerous small businesses I liked to frequent are no longer there. The recession has hurt me as a consumer. If all the grocery stores go out of business, it wouldn't matter how much money I have, I'd still starve!

And I know I am lucky regarding the two small businesses I own. A shrinking customer base could have easily hurt me there. The nature of this downturn actually created an increased customer base for my rental property.

----------------------

That last finally gets to my subject matter: horrible fiscal policy. My customer base happened to expand, but what if my customers had no money? Trickle down economics is the exact opposite of reality. Money naturally funnels upward, not trickles down. I need you to have money so I can take some of it from you.

But then the Right doesn't want me getting money. They want to funnel that money to the ultra wealthy. The extension of their policies followed to its logical end would result in one person possessing all the money. And then what would that one person do? Eat money?

It is just a really stupid fiscal policy. It will ultimately hurt the wealthy. That is why folks like Buffett and Soros fight against the insanity. They recognize this simple fact that so many of their peers just aren't bright enough to figure out.

----------------------

Investment - (n) a legal tax break; more valuable when taxes are high than when taxes are low

Did "our" politicians give money to any of the super-rich who are citizens of other countries and owe no loyalty to this one?

said that he would not extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to the whole country and he won the Election. It is that simple and he has a chance to immediately do that one way or the other. And for those that claimed he never promised to not cut Social Security or Medicare, I'll provide the source.

On October the 12, 2012, President Obama gave an interview to the AARP on Social Security and Medicare and not only that produced a booklet on Protecting Retirement Security. For Medicare, he advocated reforming the system by bringing the costs down much like he did for Obama care. He emphasized preventive care coverage and discounts on prescription drugs. He said that he would maintain the structure of both programs unlike what some people are advocating he did not say. President Obama has a mandate period to carry through on what he pandered votes for in the Election. To say he doesn't otherwise, is telling him to disrespect the electorate that gave him their votes after the election.

The people trying to persuade him that he doesn't, also have started to throw around language like Lefties, in order to give President Obama an excuse to not carry out his campaign pledges. Many of them are pundits, wealthy, and those who have conflicts of Interests. I take it personal when these people call me some radical fringe. Well put a face on your radical left. If they are African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, working class or women, then I guess that is who you are referring to because I fit within that group. So throw out the label and quit trying to weasel around it? At least Mr Romney was up front with it. A weasel is worse than an honest liar. President Obama told none of those groups that he was campaigning to bargain with Republicans or cut programs such as Social Security or Medicare. If he did, we just as well have voted for Mr Romney. So I have a p[problem with people like Mr Plouffe. He does not fit the majority of the voters who gave President Obama their votes.

the gangster class has convinced enough of the idiocracy that by voting Republican they will be paying less in taxes once they hit the lottery.

where the wealthiest tend to stomp all over the poorest (pull themselves up by their bootstraps, they just want free gifts, etc.).

I've seen people on Facebook who are in the lowest income brackets rant and rave against raising taxes for the wealthiest like they have a horse in that race. Drives me nuts.

That's right... you got a tax cut too.

The capital gain tax rate applies to anybody that has capital gains. Also, the Bush tax cuts cut ordinary income tax rates across the board. Why, then, should we only raise taxes on one segment of the population? Shouldn't the fairest way to deal with your perceived inequality of the Bush tax cuts be to simply reverse them for all people?

to read and understand my post, then I have no answer for you. Cheers.

It's time for We the People of the United States of America to get organized and reassert our sovereignty over this country.

in this Country have Romnesia. Its a very progressive disorder of the Brain. It mimicks symptoms of Dementia. It is cousin to Selective Amnesia. which explains the thought process of some of our Country's wealthiest individuals. Most of them are legacy loot holders. they have gotten their money through inheritances and trust funds. Sweat equity is the story they tell about other people. Usually while having a cocktail with like cronies.

They have acquired their wealth off the backs of ordinary americans and indentured servitude. Like John McCain, had so many homes Romnesia wouldn't let him remember. He is the product of slave owners. He may be down the line but still he is who he is. That is their real problem. They really believe they built that. Even if you are a business owner,what are you really without a consumer???? Most of our elite wealthy have had everything given to them. They can't understand why in the world we are bitching about tax rates. They don't understand that whole families live a year on what they would spend on a vacation.

Yes Fuck the gay soldier who fights for his country. Fuck the sick man with no insurance. Fuck the woman who's been impregnated after a sexual assault. Fuck the people who work to get ideas,goods, and services to market for them. Fuck the Consumer who purchases their ideas, goods, and services. Yes Fuck everybody. but please please please don't mess with their Bush Era Tax Holiday that has lasted 10 years.

I would gladly give up my payroll tax cut just so they would have to pay. And I have talked to people like myself who feel the same way. But because we don't look at Fox news we understand that rescinding tax cuts from the middle class and lower income folks would not be good for the economy. Besides no one told you that wealthy people had a conscience. Or Humanity.