If Dems won the election, why is ANYONE talking about a 3:1 ratio of spending cuts/tax increases???

[maui902]

88. I am concerned about just letting the all the cuts expire

It's just my opinion, but I think we have more leverage now than we would have after January with some agreement that averts the fiscal cliff. I am more worried than others about what happens if no deal is reached by January 1; immediate cuts in social programs, immediate job layoffs, no extension of unemployment benefits, immediate tax increases (and withholding) on all taxpayers, and, in my humble opinion, a decent chance that we send a shaky economy back into recession. The negative effects of these events can't be undone by later agreeing to a deal to cut tax rates for the middle class. I don't propose that we avert this possibility by kowtowing or giving in to Republican demands, but by insisting on a deal that the President was proposing during the campaign, which was a balance of spending cuts and tax increases. So far, I'm completely supportive of what the President has done post election: he's insisted he is not going to budge on his promise not to extend the tax cuts on incomes > $250,000, and he's now demanding $1.6 trillion in additional tax revenue to strike a deal (which he can do given that his hand has been strengthened by winning the election). And he also may insist on no cuts to Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, but then he is going to have to find spending cuts in other areas (including defense cuts) that exceed the the additional tax revenue, NOT because that's what I would propose if Democrats controlled both houses of Congress, but because we don't, which means no deal unless we can obtain the votes of all Democrats and independents in Congress plus at least 25 Republicans in the House and 7 Republicans in the Senate (unless the filibuster is ended). Realistically, I don't think you can get those votes (even from some moderate Democrats who won seats in relatively Republican districts or states) unless the deal is balanced along the lines of what the President was proposing during the campaign. If the Republicans appear to be the holdup to getting a deal done, we will ultimately win; if Democrats and the President appear to be the holdup to getting a deal done, we will ultimately lose, and it would a be a terrible opportunity wasted. Now is the time to get a deal done on terms that are mostly favorable to Democrats, but if we insist on no cuts to SS, Medicare, or to any programs other than defense, and increase tax rates above those that would be in place if the Bush tax cuts expire (even to 90% as some have posted), not only will there be no deal, but we will be seen as the party that held up the deal, and that will not be good (in my humble opinion).