General Discussion

Cosmocat

(15,424 posts)

24. Right and wrong

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 11:40 AM

Jan 2013

He is right in that the republicans being complete and total jackasses were the only thing that separated us from his cutting a lot worse deals.

But, this deal is solid on its own merit.

His only real gives here was the cutoff being 400/450,000 vs 250,000 and letting the payroll tax holiday expire.

He got a years extension on UEC that the Rs have been holding over his head, and got the modest increases in estate and dividend rates - the first pushback in those areas in a LONG time.

The overall revenue number is underwhelming, but I am assuming that is because the deal has not "cuts" to offset some financial commitments.

End of that day, it is a deal that is representative of the hand he held, IMO.

NOW, will he flat take a stand on the debt ceiling?

IDK.

But, that is seperate fromt this.

I think it is pretty clear that IF the asshats in the House will be willing to accept a deal, he WILL do something that involves cuts of some kind of SS or medicade.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

91 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Krugman's Perspective on the Deal [View all] highplainsdem Jan 2013 OP

He nails it. Tom Rinaldo Jan 2013 #1

he does. roguevalley Jan 2013 #16

Yes, he did nail it. Raksha Jan 2013 #68

I believe Obama is not going to negotiate with them over the debt ceiling. DCBob Jan 2013 #2

I believe that too.. n/t mountain grammy Jan 2013 #39

that just about sums it up. Faryn Balyncd Jan 2013 #3

Kicking the can down the road is not a win for anyone. Dawgs Jan 2013 #4

I love Obama, but I have never seen him stand firm and refuse to retreat. Honeycombe8 Jan 2013 #5

That's right. The flip side of negotiation is appeasement. As the UK learned in the late 30s, the coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #49

Yeah, I'm okay with this latest deal. But I was also okay with going off the cliff, and thought Honeycombe8 Jan 2013 #74

He has said flat out that he does NOT -- Hell Hath No Fury Jan 2013 #83

Actually ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #89

Here is the problem Doctor_J Jan 2013 #6

Mmmm.... Ravioli bar. Orrex Jan 2013 #23

Obama has never stood firm. He is not going to change. Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #7

Here's the thing: ProSense Jan 2013 #8

I'm ok with this temporary deal, although the estate tax is now permanent. Warren Stupidity Jan 2013 #10

Possibly, but ProSense Jan 2013 #11

I think that's the best part of all Freddie Jan 2013 #20

The provisions are good, so the negotiating style was good alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #14

The difference is in the short-term effects versus the long-term effects. Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #19

Like I said, I gauge things by effect alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #21

Right. For example, Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #47

No, the effects of climate change and good predictive evidence on the other points are clear enough alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #48

I respect you too, but I think you're underestimating Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #55

Here's exactly what I mean: Jackpine Radical Jan 2013 #57

+1 woo me with science Jan 2013 #87

You aren't the only one. Raksha Jan 2013 #69

Oh, snap! Sock! Pow! KA-POW! - n/t coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #50

I learned a lesson early in my career ewagner Jan 2013 #34

+1,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000 - Well put and definitely coalition_unwilling Jan 2013 #51

Truer words were never spoken. BlueStreak Jan 2013 #66

Very true! Raksha Jan 2013 #70

It's like this Tom Rinaldo Jan 2013 #30

For some ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #40

Are you honestly suggesting that DUers miss the style of Dubya? MessiahRp Jan 2013 #77

The "cowboy, absolute certainty" ... 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #86

Applause. October Jan 2013 #44

Agree. n/t lumberjack_jeff Jan 2013 #35

I think it has more to do with basic negotiation strategy bhikkhu Jan 2013 #42

If President Obama can't stand firm on raising the debt ceiling, the Senate Democrats must. RickFromMN Jan 2013 #9

This deal is only bad based on speculation about the next fight alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #12

And speculation about the next fight is based on 4 years Doctor_J Jan 2013 #31

I don't agree alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #33

+1 1StrongBlackMan Jan 2013 #43

Exactly- what we have is a continuing narrative bhikkhu Jan 2013 #46

"IF..." FailureToCommunicate Jan 2013 #13

If refers the other way as well alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #15

It's because they're rooting against him Floyd_Gondolli Jan 2013 #38

I haven't read this in 50 years. Thanks for posting this. russspeakeasy Jan 2013 #17

Thank you for posting that CitizenLeft Jan 2013 #28

Bernie Sanders AND Paul Krugman Agree: This Is As Good As It Gets Right Now cer7711 Jan 2013 #18

Krugman would obviously be a shitty negotiator Pretzel_Warrior Jan 2013 #22

Right and wrong Cosmocat Jan 2013 #24

Has the President held firm in any negotiation to date? CranialRectaLoopback Jan 2013 #25

Sounds good to me Kyad06 Jan 2013 #26

Uhhhh. Obama was pushing for $1.6T of revenue. He got $600Bn BlueStreak Jan 2013 #27

Way to get uptight over what hasn't happened yet Pretzel_Warrior Jan 2013 #29

Which means the same amoubt in spending cuts Kyad06 Jan 2013 #32

I agree, BlueStreak. I was thinking of it in a slightly different way... Peace Patriot Jan 2013 #53

It is sad that so few at DU understand this, even though it is right out in the open BlueStreak Jan 2013 #58

Krugman is expert at using multivariable calculus and differential equations to describe the economy stevenleser Jan 2013 #64

He didn't speak to it at all. BlueStreak Jan 2013 #67

+1 Hell Hath No Fury Jan 2013 #84

Provided President capitulate stands his ground. santamargarita Jan 2013 #36

It's in line with my expectations. allrevvedup Jan 2013 #37

I think Krugman is right. And also that Obama is infinitely smarter than his political foes. Zen Democrat Jan 2013 #41

Agree with Krugman. nt. OldDem2012 Jan 2013 #45

bookmarking for the responses JHB Jan 2013 #52

Does this mean there are no cuts to defense? Nt abelenkpe Jan 2013 #54

Not a dime. They kicked that down the road, and it will get caught up in the next hostage-taking BlueStreak Jan 2013 #59

The only reason sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #56

But at the same time they did this nominal increase in tax rates, they also gave multi-millionaires BlueStreak Jan 2013 #60

Yes, not only sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #61

No question about it. BlueStreak Jan 2013 #65

That about sums it up. sulphurdunn Jan 2013 #72

So Krugman says its generally good and Senator Sanders voted for it. stevenleser Jan 2013 #62

I love that you and the other "pragmatic" third wayers are throwing Sanders' name around. MessiahRp Jan 2013 #78

I'm not a "3rd wayer", but nice try at deflection. You have no explanation so you attack. stevenleser Jan 2013 #81

I've seen a number of people who attack Sanders at every turn, bandy his name about today MessiahRp Jan 2013 #90

You had a really key phrase there... stevenleser Jan 2013 #91

Listen up Paul. It's like this: DevonRex Jan 2013 #63

If that is your theory then why get sore at the natural responses to getting poked? TheKentuckian Jan 2013 #71

It isn't my response DevonRex Jan 2013 #73

WORTHY OF ITS OWN THREAD Skittles Jan 2013 #76

Well said. woo me with science Jan 2013 #80

"...evident desire to have a deal before hitting the essentially innocuous fiscal cliff Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #75

Bad taste in what progressives' mouths?? I think most of the progs who wanted Bush Tax Cuts expire Leopolds Ghost Jan 2013 #79

Yep. mmonk Jan 2013 #82

that seems to move the goalposts hfojvt Jan 2013 #85

K & R PM Martin Jan 2013 #88