Super commitee madness

18 posts / 0 new
Last post
rigel1
rigel1's picture

The super commitee is proving not to be so super. They have been meeting in private for weeks trying to work out a plan to reduce the debt. It's time to take the secret out of the super commitee. They have failed to reach a secret agreement so now it is time to let the light of truth shine in. Bring on the C-SPAN cameras and negotiate in public. Lets see what our tax money is paying for. Why are these nit wits hiding?

Comments

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
I heard the super duper

I heard the super duper commitee has prompted the Speaker of the House to break his Grover Norquist pledge by offering $250 billion in increased revenue over 10 years.  I'd almost want to thank Boehner and buy him a double bourbon, but it turns out that his offer is only good if the Bush Tax Cuts are made permanent.  I guess that would only cost us around 3 or 4 TRILLION dollars over that same time period.

Whew!!!  Thank God, I almost thought a Republican was coming to their senses.  If the Commitee has caused one person to question the Norquist Tax Pledge, I'd say it is a smashing success.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Yes, but wouldn't it be great

Yes, but wouldn't it be great to end the sneaky stuff and put these negotiations on C-SPAN? That way we could decide for ourselves rather than go through the filter of some half wit congressman or press secretary.

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
A little transparency would

A little transparency would go a long way towards electoral accountability.

rigel1
rigel1's picture
Laborisgood wrote: A little

Laborisgood wrote:

A little transparency would go a long way towards electoral accountability.

Exactly. Both sides, right and left love to babble about  "transparency." Hell will freeze over before they actually walk the talk. 

There is no excuse for all the secrecy in this process.

Sprinklerfitter
Sprinklerfitter's picture
If the rest of those no count

If the rest of those no count worthless politicians would do their frickin jobs in washington there would be no need for anykind of a super committee. Just another way for those parasites not to take blame for the mess many of them help create and keep going..

 

We're probably screwed either way......

Phaedrus76
Phaedrus76's picture
I am missing something. Under

I am missing something. Under the budget rules in order to make the Bush tax cuts permanent they need to be paid for with other tax increases or spending cuts.
I don't see how they can meet their mandate to achieve $1.2 trillion in savings and cut taxes by $3 trillion.

DRC
DRC's picture
It is a ridiculous exercise

It is a ridiculous exercise in leglislative avoidance.  Instead of doing what Congress is there to do, they appoint a "Supercommittee" to come up with an up or down proposal, and establish some consequences.  Then, as the trainwreck nears, they undo the consequences of not agreeing and we are left with whatever would be there anyway.  But without any real conversation about the nature of the problem or its solution in the reality workshop.  

The Norquist GOPimps will not address revenue honestly.  Without that, the only way there can be an agreement is to include seriously toxic elements.  What happens if nothing happens?

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
Phaedrus76 wrote:I am missing

Phaedrus76 wrote:
I am missing something. Under the budget rules in order to make the Bush tax cuts permanent they need to be paid for with other tax increases or spending cuts. I don't see how they can meet their mandate to achieve $1.2 trillion in savings and cut taxes by $3 trillion.

I heard Norman Goldman talking about it last night.  I paraphrased all that I gathered from it.  It sounded to me like Boehner was willing to throw a $250B over 10 years revenue bone to the commitee, but somehow get the Bush Tax cuts to be made permanent outside of the commitee's jurisdiction?  Norm's main point to the whole thing was to shed light on Boehner's breaking of the Norquist Pledge by offering the $250B.  Perhaps Grover would let him slide if he could pull that one off?

What is the process for getting rid of that stupid commitee?  It seems like the commitee could give the GOP cover from unwanted tax increases and Dems from unwanted spending cuts.  It's sold to us as a win-win, but I'm afraid it can just as easily be a lose-lose.

polycarp2
Since Obama appointed members

Since Obama appointed members to the Super Committee who are on record as wanting to dismantle Soc. Security and Medicare, I know where some of the budget cuts are coming from.

Bush's proposals to destroy the probgrams came to naught. Only a Dem Pres. can get away with such audacity. The 1% want the funds just as they did in Greece and Ireland. If they are as successful here as they were there....they'll get them.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease".

 

smilingcat
What a deal US$250billion for

What a deal US$250billion for a tax saving in excess of US$1million-million (US$1trillion). That's a whole lot of cash. about US$3000 per each living person in US. If you have a family of four then you have about US$12,000 in your pocket so to speak.

The super commitee's self imposed dead line, if time lined back from next Wednsday for the congress, then they need to have an agreement by today? I think. FAT CHANCE!!

And yes they the banksters will succeed in taking your social security so that you WILL NOT have any retirement. And when you are in your retirement, chances of you living in poverty will be shoot back up to the early 1900's prior to SS and that was ?? (more than 1 in 5).

Just to give you a taste of banksters arrogance here is a quote from a quant (the math whizzes who figured out a way to maximize bank profits through derivatives and other instruments as its called)

Quote:
I have the luxury of not being a regulator, which I think is a very difficult job. I used to be a physicist, and Nature doesn’t care about regulations; she cares about principles. (If you tried to regulate the motions of the planets you would have a very hard time: turn here, Earth, not too fast, spin more slowly, watch out for the moon, etc. Instead, a few principles of Newton’s take care of everything.) Therefore I’m more partial to principles than regulations, and so I’m going to take the luxury of talking about principles of modeling and the principles of capitalism that, if respected, might mitigate the need for so many regulations.

Many of the quants are from physics, computer science, mathmatics discipline. It's all about mathmatics and statistics. This guy happens to have a Phd in particle physics in Quantum Electrodynamics if I'm not mistaken.

Anyway, Super Committee will succeed in cutting social programs by failing to agree on anything. No agreement. And your economic life will become shear hell as we will go into a bigger depression than we already have. Be prepared for official 15% unemployment rate and not some 9% they are quacking. Lean on your dems to "get a spine" and stand up against the fascists banksters and crony capitalism. They want your retirement money! They want your 401K money! Because those are the only things left for the taking!!

bamboo
bamboo's picture
  Quote; "Since Obama

 

Quote;

"Since Obama appointed members to the Super Committee who are on record as wanting to dismantle Soc. Security and Medicare, I know where some of the budget cuts are coming from.

Bush's proposals to destroy the probgrams came to naught. Only a Dem Pres. can get away with such audacity. The 1% want the funds just as they did in Greece and Ireland. If they are as successful here as they were there....they'll get them."Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease".

Well said Retired Monk, reminds me of a monkey story I heard years ago-

The three in the morning rule-

"Three in the morning."  a monkey trainer who decides to give the monkeys three acorns in the morning and four in the afternoon.

The monkeys are infuriated. So the trainer says, "OK, you get four in the morning and three in the afternoon !" And the monkeys are all delighted.

Do our "representatives"  dominate us through the absurdities of politics and economics? I'd say so.

Some still seem delighted if the powers that be give us 4+3 acorns instead of 3+4 acorns? Are some catching on to the fact that the alternatives offered by our (masters) all come to the same thing? Yes and welcome to OWS! 

If the world stopped wasting its time on systems of monkey-training, a few more acorns might grow into magnificent oak trees !

  "You were born in a human form, and you find joy in it. Yet there are ten thousand other forms endlessly transforming that are equally good, and the joy of these is untold." (  Zhuangzi)

By reducing everything to a narrow, monolithic standard of value—economic value, instrumental value, or even use value—we destroy these myriad modes of enjoyment, and finally make our own lives less than enjoyable as we survey a devastated landscape of domination.

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
Unfortunately, we didn't let

Unfortunately, we didn't let the Bush Tax Cuts expire BEFORE the Super Commitee reaches their first deadline.  If they already had that revenue in the budget, the decisions they arrive at or default into would be that much less painful.  How many more times will the Commitee be allowed to rape us with impunity before the Bush Tax Cuts can be allowed to die the death they rightfully deserve?  The spending cuts necessary to offset the Bush Tax Cuts for just one year will have the greediest of the greedy dancing in the streets.  The best we can hope for is to minimize the bloodletting up until the Bush Tax Cuts expire.  Until then, pain and suffering for all (well, a vast majority anyway)!!!

polycarp2
QUOTE: "But what I sensed in

QUOTE: "But what I sensed in New York was anger not only at this economic problem, but the fact that the political system is broken. There is no one to vote for as an alternative to pro-bank candidates. So what began as anger has become a gathering awareness that Obama was simply fooling voters instead of leading the change he promised. That’s what politicians do, of course. But people hoped that he might be different. That was the gullibility he played on. He has turned into the nightmare they thought they were voting against.

Moving to the right of the Republicans, he started his administration by appointing the Simpson-Bowles Commission staffed by opponents of Social Security. He recently followed that up by appointing the Congressional Super-committee of Twelve to come out with an even more anti-Social Security, anti-Medicaid and anti-minority position that the Republicans could get away with. If they were to have tried to pass such a right-wing policy, the Democratic Congress would have refused to pass it. But they don’t know how to deal with a Democratic president who appoints Wall Street lobbyists to his cabinet and acts like Margaret Thatcher saying that There Is No Alternative (TINA) to making Social Security recipients, labor and minorities pay for Wall Street’s bad gambles and bank losses. He has helped Wall Street capture the government – on behalf of the 1%. - Michael Hudson, world class economist; -  advisor to governments..

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/18/first-steps-in-reforming-the-u-s-financial-and-tax-system/

As I said, only a Dem Pres. would have the audacity to attack Soc. Security and get away with it....because he's supposedly on the majority's side. I can see him wringing his hands now and shedding tears as he gleefully signs the legislation to do so.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease" 

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
As economically sound and

As economically sound and enticing (to those in debt) as wiping the slate clean may seem, the innate sense of unfairness would probably cause even the most indebted people to question it.  How about we wipe the slate 50% clean.  That's fair, right?

MEJ
MEJ's picture
what will it take for people

what will it take for people to learn that they can't eat money? Do we really have to destroy the whole f#@king world? Does anyone remember The Gods Must Be Crazy ? Money is our Coke bottle.

If I could drag that super awful commitee to the end of the earth and throw it off, I would. It's another consolidation of power and another blow against democracy. I question the constitutionality of the group and I can't understand how we tolerate such a blasphemy.

smilingcat
I know its easy picking.

I know its easy picking. Blame the super committee; however, many of the traders, bankers and those involved in finance have very low expectation of the supe committee to do anything. So much so that DOW average, S&P ... numbers are not going to crash. I sure would be shocked if they came to any agreement, meaningful or not.

Failure to get any agreement will be just another nail on the coffin. It will be just another proof that US political system is hopelessly broken. Expect Fitch and Moody's to downgrade following in the steps of S&P.

The whole idea of creating a super commitee is just another symptom of political failure in this country. Faux News getting tracktion, Limbaugh, O'Reiley, Cain, Perry,  Bachmann, Santorum et all. are all symptoms of failed society.

I wouldn't put much more thought on the side show. It's just a side show. Who are they trying to kid???

Rodger97321
Rodger97321's picture
Odd coincidence = my two

Odd coincidence = my two cents.

I've been rewatching the items we taped back in the 80's - and yesterday's included:  The Gods Must Be Crazy (which is the odd coincidence).

We had just put the tape on record so it included commercials, including a news tease item about Reagon backing off his line item veto plan and his suggestion that "we switch to a two year budget cycle as the current system is like pulling a rabbit out of a hat."

So we see that his party's takeaway from that wasn't to take his advice and solve it, but to add it to their [ Party before Country ] bag of tricks.

Another example of one of their favorites not being welcome in the party today.