What compromise would you find acceptable?

Please don't say nothing but think of a reasonable compromise that you would find acceptable with the goal of not raising taxes on the low and middle class while extending unemployment benefits.

closed doors said so? They haven't been connected before. Think for yourself, not in the framing of dishonest men.

Unfortunately, that is how politics works. Remember Jon Stewart, 'You go then I go'.

We don't need no stinking compromise other than let the top rate break lapse and keep the cuts for the middle and lower classes. We probably should acknowledge that if the economy was to double dip or things don't pick up to a sustainable point that we would have to look at even cutting the break for the middle and lower at some point. We need to make the hard decisions that can help get the budget back in balance. As I stated you start with the simple idea of asking those that can afford to pay a little more, and it really is just a little more, to do their part and pay. You leave the break where it will help the economy because those people spend and without demand the corporations will not hire and expand. Well off people bitching about paying 3% more when they were more than capable of paying and did 8 years ago just makes me sick. Do these people realize what the rates were back in the 50's and 60's in comparison they have it real easy these days.

To the 'greedy' rich out there (yes there are rich people that do a lot of good things with their money and aren't 'greedy') we don't owe you anything, you are not 'American Royalty' and as much as you would like to be separate from the masses in your gated communities you are American's and have just as much responsibility to make this a country that supports everybody as the lowest of the low. If you don't mind paying your tax dollars for wars that you can profit on how in the name of God can you mind paying a few more dollars to help your fellow man and yes they are your 'fellow men and women' not 'bums, losers and no good welfare cheats'. They are children, mothers and fathers, brother and sisters and they deserve to have a way to make a decent living. They deserve to have a roof over their heads without worrying about somebody coming and kicking them out because there are no jobs available or because you have caused the economy to tank while you were sucking money out of it. Oh well, I could go on with this rant but I think I have made my point.

"compromise" was. Federal workers got the shaft prior to the meeting and, after the meeting, Republicans, in general, were nearly giddy. I think the only thing they might have given was "temporary" for "permanent" with the thought that in 2 years - during another election - no one is going to want to rehash the issue and they'll be extended again. What shouldn't be in the bill is tax cuts for the wealthy, a cut in social security deductions and a more generous inheritance tax.

However, if you insist, 1:1. Equal costs: tax cuts for billionaires, unemployment benefit extensions.

Offhand, the current differential is around 10:1 for billionaires.

They say that extending the tax breaks will help reduce unemployment, then have them put their money where their mouth is. The rate they'll end up paying at the end of the year will be based on the drop in unemployment by then. If it goes down two points, then they get their two percent.

Conversely, unemployment benefits will be extended for as long as unemployment stays above, say 8%.

Since the Fed is a wholly owned subsidiary of the banksters, they have given up their responsibility to help the larger economy.

But if you tie the amount of money a bankster can make to unemployment, I'll bet everyone would have a good job in 3 months.

the extension of tax cuts for the wealthy or else the plan will be fillubustered by repubs in the senate. With all the anger coming from Dems these days against the president, not one dem has a plan that can survive a repub fillubuster in the senate.....

If the senate repubs will DEFINITELY fillubuster a tax bill that does not extend cuts for the wealthy you cannot fight the fillubuster....they have the votes to filubuster and that's the end of the story....THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS WORLD THAT WILL PREVENT A SENATE FILLUBUSTER HERE....NOTHING....so go fight a losing battle and then everything is lost (middle class tax cuts, cuts for the lowest tax bracket, UI, etc...)...but we fought so we won but we really lost everything....makes no sense!

Pragmaticly, I know that Democrats seriously misplayed their hand and fumbled away their chance to come out of this with a victory holding the line at tax cuts below $250,000 only. Raising that to a half million is not nearly as much of budget buster as what is now being proposed, and no one would receive 6 figure tax refunds as a result of this compromise. Plus it helps discredit the Republican line that so many small busineses will be hurt with a $250,000 cut off. But the estate tax rate still needs to be revised upwards.

extended the cuts for everyone under a million. That was voted on last Saturday and was defeated.

...that would have been defeated also. There is a game of chicken going on but the results of that game are very predictable if one side always says, "Oh no, someone might get hurt, tell us what we have to do to avoid that."

Go ahead, let the 'Pugs continue to filibuster. Let them defend a position that is universally despised. Then the Dems can hammer them for their obstructionism, for their elitism. Even the Tea Party folks are outraged over tax cuts for the rich. Let them filibuster, let's play that game of political chicken, and I guarantee you that the 'Pugs will crack before the end of the year.

Are you saying that Obama as president can over rule a fillubuster? There is no fight here because the repubs have and will abuse the fillubuster ....

But what about the unemployed? Should their children have to go hungry to stand up for your principles?

I think we should have let all the tax cuts expire and make clear to the GOP that the only deal which wouldn't be vetoed would include unemployment benefits lasting as long as any tax cut did, no payroll tax cut at all (expand making work pay instead), and no estate tax revisions (ie a return to pre Bush levels which were hardly onerous). If we showed a willingness to do that I think the GOP could be chipped down in their demands and we would get a deal where middle class tax cuts were permanently extended, UNE and income tax cuts for the rich got a 2 year extention, and making work pay was expanded upward to look like the payroll tax cut but not be payroll money.

Most of the money will go to wage earners of well above average means that are going to sit on theirs.

What is going to go to the majority under 75k does not justify the package.

Raising the higher tax liability to one million dollars instead of $250,000 is a compromise but the Republicans and DINOs don't see it that way. They do not want compromise but their way or the highway.

that's a deal.

1 in 3 workers (the very poorest) are getting a tax increase as the result of doing the payroll tax holiday instead of the Making Work Pay credit.

but unemployment benefits are to run right along side of that. So if the tax extention never ends, neither would unemployment benefits.