Latest Hypothetical Deal

[jonny5]

Well at least we are in the correct half of congress finally. The House has already passed several bills, while the Senate has done nothing. But this latest deal is more of the same. Raise taxes on the rich. But what do Republicans get? What are democrats losing in this deal? Everyone is getting low rates on the middle class, they all want that. Democrats want more taxes from the rich. They would get that in this deal. I just dont see anything for the Republicans. The debate has been soley about how much the Republicans will give up.

'Fiscal cliff' focus shifts to Senate; estate tax emerges as key in talks - The Hill

The consensus that emerged during the meeting is that Senate Republicans could accept a deal that extends the Bush-era income tax rates for a vast majority of the populace and also extends the 35 percent tax rate on inheritances over $5 million per spouse, according to the GOP lawmaker.

Another Republican senator confirmed that such a proposal could attract a significant number of Republican votes, especially if it shifted the threshold for extending income tax rates to cover family income up to $400,000 or $500,000.

But there are obstacles. Liberal Senate Democrats may balk at the prospect of extending the estate tax in its current form. Many liberals were furious after Obama struck a deal with McConnell two years ago extending all of the Bush-era income tax rates and setting the estate tax at its current level.

Senate Republicans would be further enticed to support a package that kept dividend tax rates from rising to their pre-2003 levels. Obama’s budget proposed letting the 2003 dividend tax cut expire, which would boost the rate for married couples earning over $250,000 from 15 percent to 39.6 percent.
Liberal Democrats such as Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) declined to say whether keeping the estate tax at its current level would jeopardize their support for a deal.

 

[CalGun]

I have a new deal. Odd years we let the democrats have whatever they want. Even years Republicans get what they want. People can then live under both and vote accordingly.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I have a new deal. Odd years we let the democrats have whatever they want. Even years Republicans get what they want. People can then live under both and vote accordingly.

The problem, as I see it, is that neither the demorats nor the republicants are really against federal spending being far more that they dare ask for in federal taxation, just that they see different issues as federal spending priorities. Both parties are quite content to buy needed votes (on credit) and neither party dare challenge the sources of their campaign cash by cutting any gov't benefits now given to them.

 

[Fisher]

I'd be happy if they just ended long-term unemployment, but they won't. I'd be happy if they just starting phasing out EIC, but they won't. I'd be happy if we pulled out of Korea, but they won't. I'd be happy if they removed the rules that encourage departments to spend all they are budgeted to avoid penalty, but they won't; I'd be happy if departments and agencies were allowed some room to re-arrange their budgets, but they won't. In short, I'd be happy if we get some systemic change in the status quo other than tax rates, but we won't.

 

[blaxshep]

I just dont see anything for the Republicans. The debate has been soley about how much the Republicans will give up.

That is what the Democrats call a comprimise.