Monday Reads
Posted: December 31, 2012 Filed under: morning reads | Tags: Debt Ceiling, deficit, fiscal cliff, gang rape in India, republican politics, Social Security 76 Comments
Happy New Year’s Eve!!
Congress continues to drag us down its path of dysfunction. This headline from Lindsey Graham should win him a congressional hearing for sedition.
But in an interview on Fox News Sunday this morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) threatened to oppose this must-pass bill unless Social Security benefits are taken away from millions of future retirees:
I’m not going to raise the debt ceiling unless we get serious about keeping the country from becoming Greece, saving Social Security and Medicare [sic]. So here’s what i would like: meaningful entitlement reform — not to turn Social Security into private accounts, not to take a voucher approach to Medicare — but, adjust the age for Social Security, CPI changes and means testing and look beyond the ten-year window. I cannot in good conscience raise the debt ceiling without addressing the long term debt problems of this country and I will not.
Unbelievable. We continue to see a series of really ridiculous memes spouted by the right. These included dragging Social Security into the debt crisis when it has nothing to do with the Federal budget, deficit or debt other than it is a primary investor in Treasury bills and bonds. We also continue hear about our country going the way of Greece or going bankrupt. We have the reserve currency of the world, a huge country filled with taxable assets and treasury bills and bonds under high demand. How many times do I have to call shenanigans on these cretins?
Two Republican senators want to use the threat of an economic meltdown to raise the retirement age and cut Medicare. Sens. Bob Corker (R-TN) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) introduced a plan today that would raise the federal debt limit by $1 trillion in exchange for $1 trillion in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, as The Hill reported:
The Corker-Alexander dollar-for-dollar plan has several components.
It would structurally reform Medicare by creating competing private options giving seniors greater choice of healthcare plans. It would not, however, cap Medicare spending.
The plan would also give states more flexibility to manage Medicaid programs and prevent states from “gaming the federal share of the program with state tax charges.”
It would gradually raise the Social Security retirement age and use the “chained CPI” formula to calculate cost-of-living adjustments, curbing the growing cost of benefits.
In exchange, it would direct the debt limit be increased by the same amount as the savings generated from entitlement reform.
The U.S. will hit its debt limit on or around December 31st. The Treasury Department estimates that, using extraordinary measures, it could avoid default for another two months or so. Allowing the U.S. to default on its debt via not raising the debt ceiling could cause a complete financial meltdown. The 2011 debt ceiling debacle — during which House Republicans nearly pushed the country into a default due to their intransigence on taxes — cost the country about $19 billion in higher interest payments and at least one million jobs.
So, here’s an interesting bit of history on its way to the British Museum.
The largest Viking ship ever found, a 118 foot troop carrier, is to go on display at the British museum 1,000 years after it helped King Canute control the seas of northern Europe.
The long boat, known as Roskilde 6 because it was part of a batch found in the Danish city, is slowly being dried out in giant steel tanks.
Once it is stabilised and fitted to a steel frame, it will travel to Britain to go on display at the British museum where it will be a star attraction at an exhibition.
The warship was discovered by chance in 1996 at Roskilde as the local ship museum was being extended.
It is believed it was deliberately sunk along with other ships to narrow the fjord and protect the approach to the former capital of Denmark.
It was an incredible example of ship technology in its day and would have taken up to 30,000 hours to build.
Once again, I agree with Paul Krugman who says that deficit reduction really isn’t the Republican goal in all of these fiscal cliff talks. All we’d have to do is go back to the Eisenhower tax rates and we’d solve the problem pretty quickly which is why I hate it whenever I hear an idiot talk about bankrupting grandchildren’s future. Again, World War 2 didn’t depress the 1950s or 1960s did it? That level of debt and high, high tax rates didn’t bring about a second great depression.
Evan Soltas of Wonkblog and Joe Weisenthal of Business Insider both make the same point, in more detail, that I tried to make in my series on ONE TRILLION DOLLARS: the current budget deficit is overwhelmingly the result of the depressed economy, and it’s not clear that we have a structural budget problem at all, let alone the fundamental mismatch between what we want and what we’re willing to pay for that people like to claim exists.
Bush should’ve never been allowed to run two wars for decades without making people pay for it.
India’s outrage grows over the instances of gang rape and the death of one 23 year old woman. Police are preparing arrest warrants in the case and will charge 
six men with murder.
The trial of the six, who allegedly assaulted the physiotherapy student in the back of a bus on Dec. 16, will start after police file charge documents on Jan. 3, Delhi police spokesman Rajan Bhagat said by phone today.
An Air India plane brought the woman’s body back from Singapore and it was cremated today, the Press Trust of India reported. Demonstrators gathered at the Jantar Mantar, an 18th- century observatory and traditional rallying point, demanding speedy punishment for the alleged rapists while some held placards calling for them to receive the death penalty.
Thousands joined protests and candlelit vigils to mark the death yesterday. Some protesters held placards calling for the improved treatment of women in India as they congregated in Mumbai, Hyderabad and Bangalore. Others braved the cold winter’s evening in New Delhi to carry candles or meet in quiet prayer.
So, that’s my offerings today. What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
peej
Carissa
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
I’m having a difficult time coming to terms with the GOP point of view: We will only begin to “negotiate” if the poor, the elderly, the handicapped, the seniors are forced to endure cuts before we consider a “deal”.
Does this make sense to anyone? Increasing taxes by a few points on the rich is out of the question but asking the most vulnerable amongst us to sacrifice even more is acceptable?
For the life of me I am unable to understand anyone defending this theory. It is beyond comprehension.
I agree Pat, and with this Bash news item, I can only say one thing: Source: Democrats offer higher threshold for tax increases – CNN Political Ticker – CNN.com Blogs
Fuck the congressional democrats!
Exactly! Do you personally know anyone that earns over 250 thousand a year? I sure as hell don’t.
To me that figure represents wealth. Most of us would live quite comfortably with that as our annual income and would not feel “deprived” if our rate was upgraded by a mere 3%. Chump change.
But for those who will suffer from the effects of this “deal” even a few hundred less annually would be felt in our day to day survival.
This is where the argument falls flat A family with a handicapped child as one example would feel the burden of the expense in caring for that child if they were to receive less aid.
Welcome back to the age of Charles Dickens.
They’d be much smarter to just go over the cliff than accept a stupid deal.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-bernstein/fiscal-cliff-update_b_2384460.html
Agree to all of the above! And it’s only the income above $250,000 that would get the higher rate, not the entire income. So it’s a ludicrously small difference.
I say shove ’em all off the “cliff,” and too bad it’s a bunny slope.
“Do you personally know anyone that earns over 250 thousand a year? I sure as hell don’t”
Never thought of it Pat, but I don’t think I do. Maybe my doctor does, but I’m not even sure of that because she’s a small town doc who has a lot of seniors. Damn I’m feeling poor. .
The biggest problem is that the corporate media defends the theory of making the poorest suffer for the sins of the rich. A few cases in point: Tom Brokaw and Dancin’ Dave Gregory.
Truer words were not spoken. Lest we forget, they are among the rich and won’t be touched by any of the “pain” they so love to discuss for the rest of us.
True dat, BB!!
I have no idea … it’s evil.
Agreed.
I’ve got the t.v. on in another room and I think it was Tom Coburn being interviewed on Morning Joe decrying the need to curtail our overspending. Really?
Had he considered perhhaps pulling the plug on our presence in Afghanistan as one way of “curtailing” billions being sent down the rabbit hole?
How about those subsidies to big oil? You know, those companies whose profits exceed whatever god has left in his treasury as another way to stop the bleeding?
What better way to approach this so called problem than to introduce UHC that would stop some of the bleeding that comes from the rise in healthcare premiums as lobbyists for that industry write the laws that guarantee them 33% of the revenue collected before the insured is allowed to tap into his account?
Maybe plugging up the holes for tax exemptions for the rich which allows them to keep their money in offshore accounts thus beating the system and calling this “legal”? Or taxing those companies who outsource their products while the American workers scrambles to find a job?
No, better to the cord on families having to deal with elderly parents, handicapped children, veteran services, and seniors who never earned more than 50 thousand dollars – if that – in their entire lives.
These people have no idea of what the rest of this nation faces on a day to day basis but they are quick to recommend “cuts to services” that keep most of us alive.
How this can be defended is incomprehensible.
H/T Susie Madrak: Why Is Obama Caving on Taxes? — Daily Intelligencer
Obama just increases and validates my doubts I have had about him all along.
Conclusion: he is not to be trusted. Just another “weakling” giving in to the schoolyard bully demanding his lunch money. More so now when he has them where he wants them and should be holding all the cards in this “bargain” but instead is willing to give away the store to appease these liars and cheats.
I’m disgusted.
I don’t understand them. I am not rich by any means, but I would be willing to pay more instead of sticking it to the poor. Let those who can afford it pay a bit more; it is that simple.
If the GOP was a dog, we’d put it down for it’s own sake.
Either that or institute BSL for them – which isn’t a bad idea for the GOP and some of our “reps” who claim they are Dems.
That would also be an improvement. Hint, Kent Conrad, hint.
Obama will speak on the fiscal “cliff” at 1:30PM. Cave time?
MSNBC: Any changes on taxes will be “permanent.” Isn’t that just ducky?
Senate Dems very unhappy with the “deal” now being negotiated. Tom Harkin says:
Dare I hope they are so unhappy they will tell Obama he’s full of bipartisan cowardice?
Obama would try to buy a new car by offering twice what it was worth. It’s a crying shame we end up suffering for his spinelessness. WTF did this coward win an election for?
Don’t hold your breath.
It’s a fundamental mistake to make any deal which doesn’t also take care of the coming debt ceiling blackmail. It does no good to put the problem off for a couple of months and then have the world economy taken hostage by the House economic terrorists again!
That doesn’t seem to be a possibility. We could be looking at four more years of this bullshit.
By the way, does anyone think Orange Julius can get any deal made in the Senate to pass in the House?
That’s my only hope. I still think going over the cliff is better than what they’re talking about. According to Durbin, this deal doesn’t even reduce the deficit and it will bring in only $800 billion in revenue. It’s a joke.
Nah.
I think the revenue is more like $715 billion. We’re going backward. This is a huge mistake!
All of the dems and about 20 repubs need to support it. The question is will he bring it to the floor for a vote and will the dems cave to the whip?
The answer to your question is, yes, the Dems will fold and vote to destroy the U.S. economy and hand even more money to the rich.
Why is it important to make the alternataive mimimum tax patch permanent?
So the middling-rich people can save a few pennies. I’m being cynical (realistic). Actually we need dakinikat to explain.
I needed that laugh Luna.
Just a repeat of my comment on last thread in re: the Daily Beast CDS Hillary article that JJ linked to. Their “expert” is an infectious disease expert. He should stick to prognostications on influenza and the like. Interesting that they could not find a mild brain injury specialist or a neurologist to talk to them on record.
Post-concussion rest is not bed rest, it just means don’t do anything which could cause a 2nd head injury.
Long airplane flights increase risk of clots for anyone, usually in the leg veins. That’s why the advice is to move your legs and walk every so often on long flights. I doubt Hillary is “prone” to clots — but she does have a very high occupational risk with all the travel she does for her job. She is far and away the most-traveled SoS. A venous clot that gets loose may end up in the lung which is nasty and called a pulmonary embolus. A brain clot would have started in the brain or somewhere upstream from the brain.
Guidelines are to not give anticoagulants if there has been recent trauma. One could, but it’s thought the bleed risk would be too high. So it sounds like they are not as concerned about causing new bleeds — may mean the concussion trauma was extremely mild, which is good — or it’s more important to prevent further clots. Any decision would be based on weighing risks vs benefits.
So far, there’s no definite information that indicates a poor prognosis, and a few bits that could indicate a very good prognosis. I very much hope it’s the latter case. Speculation could go on forever, but I’m on the side of those who feel public figures don’t need to give out all their medical details in a case like this.
May Hillary improve completely, and her family have time together without being hounded by the media.
Thank you much Luna, the media hounds are going pretty low these days. And I am a firm believer in privacy rights (hippa). Clotting is dangerous, and you are right, and her job does have safety concerns.
I may need a break, because my latest thought is that Obama should be impeached for giving away the store as he seems to be doing.
Why Republicans think they’re winning the fiscal cliff.
We are headed for European-style austerity and probably global depression, thanks to Obama’s idiotic dream of “bipartisanship.”
It pisses me off too!
Krugman: Conceder In Chief? – NYTimes.com
from the link:
We should all send postcards, e-mails, faxes and twitters to Obama: You coward!
I thought the same thing – he should be impeached. I said during the campaign that all liberals should throw their support behind Jill Stein, but alas that did not happen.
I hear ya BB…………………we are once again screwed.
Republicans say they don’t want us to be like Greece, but they are doing their damndest to make it happen anyway.
So true BB……Those Mf’ers
Then there is Judge Gary Harger in Austin, Texas who says Texas can cut all funds to planned parenthood………………so much for helping poor women in Texas.
They’re fucking delusional, that’s the ticket.
Why the White House thinks it’s winning the ‘fiscal cliff’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/31/why-the-white-house-thinks-its-winning-the-fiscal-cliff/
Jeeze, when did the projected revenues drop from $800 million to $600 million? I can’t keep up. WTF is the point of this whole exercise? Is this all a buildup to the final cave when Obama hands over the Social Security money to Wall Street?
Who knows at this point? I’m totally shell shocked by the abject cowardice being displayed!!!!!
Bagdad Bob from your link:
Let’s face it, Republicans won the presidential election.
Jonathan Chait:
This was my favorite line in that link:
“The estate tax would exempt estates up to $10 million and tax them at 40 percent above” that.”
Really? We wouldn’t want to tax the poor folks who only inherit a measley $10 million, that would be just too much of a sacrifice. Our society is so fucked up!!!!
Are you kidding? What we need most is for 80-90-yr old women to “feel pain” while guys like Dancin’ Dave get more tax breaks.
I imagine the rafts that will be used to set seniors adrift are already under construction.
And Wolf Blitzer is on CNN, right now, stating and re-stating, emphatically that “we’re going over the fiscal cliff”.
More idiocy from the gun nuts:
http://seattletimes.com/text/2020024832.html
Still a long way to go, but better news for workers in China:
http://seattletimes.com/text/2020003992.html
Some fun news on the new “MoMath” in NYC:
http://seattletimes.com/text/2020010960.html
Oh this is cool, going to post this link on the new thread.
Any news about whether the “deal” will do anything to keep milk from going up to $8 per gallon?
Not just milk. The consumer price index is going to go off the chart. Just hoping that cat and dog food remain relatively inexpensive – although currently I pay 2.00 per can, so no hope for the poor there.
There was a separate compromise that’ll keep milk prices from skyrocketing for one more year.
Yep, that one got done earlier today.
Thank goodness.
Looks like no vote in the House for this crappy deal tonight, so we’re going over. Thank goodness.
Good. Maybe Obama tanked it deliberately, lol. Eleven dimensional chess, doncha know?
Eleven dimensional dumb ass more likely!
Boehner wants to preserve his speakership …
Adding insult to injury.
Obama’s wrong: This ‘cliff’ deal still raises taxes on the middle class
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/31/obamas-wrong-this-cliff-deal-still-raises-taxes-on-the-middle-class/
I’m no economist, but I thought the payroll tax holiday was a bad idea in the first place because it makes it easier to chip away at Social Security. I’d be in favor of something similar to the Making Work Pay tax credit of a few years ago.
Same here.
So would I, but this is a fiscal contraction none the less. It should be replaced or maintained.
Absolutely.
Conceder In Chief?
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/conceder-in-chief-2/
I’ve posted an open thread up above.
ah … i haven’t refreshed my screen … I took a second nap of the day and just pulled these from my tweet feed on the android
Robert Reich
The deal emerging from the Senate is a lousy one. Let me count the ways:
1. Republicans haven’t conceded anything on the debt ceiling, so over the next two months – as the Treasury runs out of tricks to avoid a default – Republicans are likely to do exactly what they did before, which is to hold their votes on raising the ceiling hostage to major cuts in programs for the poor and in Medicare and Social Security.
2. The deal makes tax cuts for the rich permanent (extending the Bush tax cuts for incomes up to $400,000 if filing singly and $450,000 if jointly) while extending refundable tax credits for the poor (child tax credit, enlarged EITC, and tuition tax credit) for only five years. There’s absolutely no justification for this asymmetry.
3. It doesn’t get nearly enough revenue from the wealthiest 2 percent — only $600 billion over the next decade, which is half of what the President called for, and a small fraction of the White House’s goal of more than $4 trillion in deficit reduction. That means more of the burden of tax hikes and spending cuts in future years will fall on the middle class and the poor.
4. It continues to exempt the first $5 million of inherited wealth from the estate tax (the exemption used to be $1 million). This is a huge gift to the heirs of the wealthy, perpetuating family dynasties of the idle rich.
Yes, the deal finally gets Republicans to accept a tax increase on the wealthy, but this is an inside-the-Beltway symbolic victory. If anyone believes this will make the GOP more amenable to future tax increases, they don’t know how rabidly extremist the GOP has become.
The deal also extends unemployment insurance for more than 2 million long-term unemployed. That’s important.
But I can’t help believe the President could have done better than this. After all, public opinion is overwhelmingly on his side. Republicans would have been blamed had no deal been achieved.
More importantly, the fiscal cliff is on the President’s side as well. If we go over it, he and the Democrats in the next Congress that starts later this week can quickly offer legislation that grants a middle-class tax cut and restores most military spending. Even rabid Republicans would be hard-pressed not to sign on.