Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The headline on huffington is: "Obama ready to cave?". I see nothing in the article or anywhere (Original Post) still_one Dec 2012 OP
They are saying he is willing to move the tax limit up to $450K.... kentuck Dec 2012 #1
That is not a cave, in my view. A lot of other things would be a cave still_one Dec 2012 #3
Of the things to give on, this is the least bad democrattotheend Dec 2012 #38
It's a ridiculous argument alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #4
Moving the limit to $450k IS getting rolled! Owl Dec 2012 #9
Bullshit alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #12
And you just *had* to come here and repeat it Fumesucker Dec 2012 #2
no, I do not see the President as caving, at least based on this article, and I am criticizing still_one Dec 2012 #5
... which is obvious to everyone who reads your OP. Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #16
I am responding to the person who implied I should not have posted it in the first place still_one Dec 2012 #17
Yes, I recognize that. Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #18
$450,000 is BULLSHIT. It is a bad move on Obama's part. It makes him look less serious about JaneyVee Dec 2012 #6
Exactly! Owl Dec 2012 #11
That's a lot of hokum alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #13
Tabloid headlines Brainstormy Dec 2012 #7
exactly, and that was my point still_one Dec 2012 #8
Provocative headlines make more money riqster Dec 2012 #10
I guess so. Accuracy isn't the prime objective still_one Dec 2012 #14
It reminds me of the Enquirer headline from years ago: Was Einstein Gay? Buzz Clik Dec 2012 #15
I agree. boxman15 Dec 2012 #19
It will all depend on whether Boehner has the stones to take it to the floor alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #20
I don't think he has it in him. boxman15 Dec 2012 #23
The Arianna Huff-n-Puff has mastered the use of the Cavuto Mark... n/t backscatter712 Dec 2012 #21
And it's catnip to the CakeGrrl Dec 2012 #22
Makes for good copy, doncha know. Arkana Dec 2012 #24
And nobody noticed that the GOP caved on Chained CPI... backscatter712 Dec 2012 #25
They caved on tax rate; they caved on the level for rate increase; they caved on social programs alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #31
Personally... 99Forever Dec 2012 #26
We talk about lots of sources here. But that's just us. DevonRex Dec 2012 #32
I'm guessing... 99Forever Dec 2012 #33
Who the fuck cares about HuffPo? DevonRex Dec 2012 #34
Apparently the OP does.(S)He saw fit to drag it over here. 99Forever Dec 2012 #35
Hahaha. My, aren't you touchy? DevonRex Dec 2012 #36
Hahaha. My, aren't you ridiculous? 99Forever Dec 2012 #37
Welcome to the HP-AOL merger where right wing AOL controls the content. n/t Tempest Dec 2012 #27
Does anyone other than me realize that outlets like Huffpo & Drudge are the reason nothing can get.. Tarheel_Dem Dec 2012 #28
Three reasons I don't approve of or believe 2naSalit Dec 2012 #29
Saw that. And Arianna obviously has a crush on Marco Rubio-- TwilightGardener Dec 2012 #30

kentuck

(111,098 posts)
1. They are saying he is willing to move the tax limit up to $450K....
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:52 AM
Dec 2012

...which means he is getting rolled again, in their opinion.

democrattotheend

(11,605 posts)
38. Of the things to give on, this is the least bad
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 05:10 PM
Dec 2012

Better raise the floor than lower the top rate or give on capital gains or cut SS

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
4. It's a ridiculous argument
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:59 AM
Dec 2012

I'd prefer $388,500 to be the line in the sand on rate increases.

But the increased rate on dividends really does offset that a bit - drawing additional revenues from the top 2% of the population where the rate line at $450,000 or $500,000 and no other revenues would not. Obviously would like to have estate as well, but both these features maintain the principle that the very wealthy should pay more.

If we review the Republican position, we see how eroded their defense is:

1) They insisted on no tax RATE increase PERIOD. They would find revenue other ways. They abandoned this position.

2) Having abandoned the "No rate Increase" position, they tried to set the rate at $1,000,000 or greater in income, and no other changes. This position, too, has fallen.

3) There was a HuffPo story this weekend that suggested the new Republican position was $500,000. Apparently, it is $550,000, but they might accept a capital gains increase alongside that.

When you look at where they started, you really see how far they've fallen. meanwhile, the Dem position started at yes on rates, and Rate at $250,000, and has apparently moved up to $450,000. That means no tax rate increases on the middle class, and only a slight movement up in brackets. Moreover, when a capital gains rate is included in the rate changes, you draw revenue from top incomes at roughly the level you would if the rate was something like $350,000, so the actual uptick is even more slight. The rate is a way for GOPers to save face. The capital gains increase may actually offset the income rate completely back down to $250,000.

GOPers go from NO RATE INCREASE! to OK, but $1,000,000, to OK, but $450,000 AND increased capital gains (essentially drawing the same revenue from the top 2%), and HuffPo calls this an Obama cave?!? With no tax rate increases under $250,000 (Obama's actual promise) and probable unemployment extension?!? It's very clear that some people just like to yell that Obama has "caved," facts be damned. That's not a "cave." It is a fairly definitive victory.

still_one

(92,212 posts)
5. no, I do not see the President as caving, at least based on this article, and I am criticizing
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:00 AM
Dec 2012

huffington for this headline.

So I would I criticize it without saying what I am criticizing?

geez

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
16. ... which is obvious to everyone who reads your OP.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:21 AM
Dec 2012

Why you are being forced to explain is a mystery.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
18. Yes, I recognize that.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:31 AM
Dec 2012

I was criticizing the poster who pretended to not understand why you put up your OP.

 

JaneyVee

(19,877 posts)
6. $450,000 is BULLSHIT. It is a bad move on Obama's part. It makes him look less serious about
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:01 AM
Dec 2012

actual deficit reduction and makes him look like he really just has a vengeance against rich people, kind of how the GOP has been portraying him for the past 4 years. Raising taxes on those making $450,000/yr affects almost NO ONE. HE doesn't even get paid $450,000/yr. Personally, I would make it $150,000/yr if we're serious about paying down deficits, but it seems like we're only serious about cutting the middle classes life line.

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
13. That's a lot of hokum
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:12 AM
Dec 2012

The rate at $450,000, while reducing the increased revenues somewhat, hardly eliminate them: it sets them at about $1 trillion rather than the previous $1.6. When a capital gains increase for those over $250,000 is added (at 20%), the revenue jumps up again, and this is all from the top 2%.

The notion that the rate at $450,000 affects nobody is simply not true. there is no massive revenue fall-off at that level.

Now, I'd also support the rate at $250,000 and perhaps even $150,000 (though that would be a much harder sell for families). But to say the rate at $450,000 is ineffective at reducing the deficit is flat out false.

riqster

(13,986 posts)
10. Provocative headlines make more money
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:07 AM
Dec 2012

Like most other "news" outlets, HuffPo is primarily interested in turning a profit.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
15. It reminds me of the Enquirer headline from years ago: Was Einstein Gay?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:20 AM
Dec 2012

You read the article, and it says he was not gay. But you read the article.

boxman15

(1,033 posts)
19. I agree.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:52 AM
Dec 2012

If I was Obama, I'd wait until Jan. 4 to negotiate again, but that's not what he's doing. That being said, I have no idea how this is a cave. It still raises $1 trillion in revenue (through higher tax rates on the top), makes no concessions on the safety net or anything else, etc. It's certainly not ideal, but Obama obviously feels that it's better to have a decent deal now than no deal at all.

When I saw that headline, I was bracing for a Social Security cut or Medicare eligibility age raise. Nothing even remotely close.

That being said, I still think we're going over the cliff. We've made significant progress before, only to have the GOP back away at the last second after realizing what a difficult sell any taxes would be to their Tea Party caucus, no matter how favorable the deal.

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
20. It will all depend on whether Boehner has the stones to take it to the floor
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:54 AM
Dec 2012

If he does, it will pass with a Minority-Majority coalition to subvert the Tea Party crazies.

boxman15

(1,033 posts)
23. I don't think he has it in him.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:59 AM
Dec 2012

He wants to be Speaker again more than anything in the world. Allowing the bill to pass with majority Democratic support would make that less likely come Jan. 4.

CakeGrrl

(10,611 posts)
22. And it's catnip to the
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:56 AM
Dec 2012

"Obama's a Trojan GOP granny-killer crowd"

Don't think the media hasn't caught onto that. They play part of the left like a fiddle. They try to erode his support from every angle.

Arkana

(24,347 posts)
24. Makes for good copy, doncha know.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:01 PM
Dec 2012

"Obama, Congress Close To Deal" is a lot less zingy than "OBAMA ABOUT TO CAVE AND BETRAY EVERYONE".

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
31. They caved on tax rate; they caved on the level for rate increase; they caved on social programs
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:59 PM
Dec 2012

They appear to be caving on capital gains rate! On capital gains, fer chrissake!

But this is all very bad for the "spineless" Dems, doncha know?

What planet are these people living on?

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
26. Personally...
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:10 PM
Dec 2012

... if I have a problem with a particular source, I take it up with that source, not go whining somewhere else about it.


But hey, that's just me.

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)
32. We talk about lots of sources here. But that's just us.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:38 PM
Dec 2012

You go right over and post on whatever websites you want to, though. Feel free. We like to voice our opinions here so people know what kind of news they get around the web. It's informative. Call it a service we provide each other. Since we're a community and all.

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
33. I'm guessing...
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:10 PM
Dec 2012

.. that you and your "community and all" have Huffpo just shaking in their boots, by whining about it here.

DevonRex

(22,541 posts)
34. Who the fuck cares about HuffPo?
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 03:16 PM
Dec 2012

Are they immune to criticism for some reason? Explain that to us. We're all ears.

99Forever

(14,524 posts)
35. Apparently the OP does.(S)He saw fit to drag it over here.
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:18 PM
Dec 2012

Me? Not so much.

I'm not obligated to "explain" jackshit to you or anyone else, especially a steaming pile of made up fertilizer such as that.

Tarheel_Dem

(31,234 posts)
28. Does anyone other than me realize that outlets like Huffpo & Drudge are the reason nothing can get..
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:17 PM
Dec 2012

done in Washington? Who wants to wake up to a headline like this? The internet has made "journalists" out of Jane & Joe Sixpack, without any formal education in journalism, and it's the root of many of our problems. Things that used to be routine have now become fodder for headlines like "Obama" or "Boehner Ready to Cave". This makes it very difficult to reach any kind of concensus, because compromise is now headlined as "CAVING". Teddy Kennedy and Tip O'Neil would be labeled as turncoats these days, because they were famous for making deals.

The polarization has been amplified by "news" outlets like Huffpo & Drudge, and it's sickening.

2naSalit

(86,643 posts)
29. Three reasons I don't approve of or believe
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:37 PM
Dec 2012

the headlines on HuffPo...

1. They merged with AOL (and for that reason)

2. Steven Colbert refers to it as "Huffin' Puff"

3. Jon Stewart calls it "Side Boob Gazette"

Because 1. is true, 2.&3. are correct. Ariana sold out and succumbed to the News is Entertainment theology after building up a news based fan club, and she sold them out.

So any headline like the OP refers to should be simply disregarded as pap and little more. They gain revenue by the length of time you keep the site up on your screen and the number of pages you select to view. That is all they care about. Reporting is a sham and you might notice that they rehash a lot of their stories with fresh titles to try and make you think they have something to say. A waste of time.

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
30. Saw that. And Arianna obviously has a crush on Marco Rubio--
Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:38 PM
Dec 2012

two days of his stupid page-sized mug is more than enough.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The headline on huffingto...