Support NeoGAF

[Suikoguy]

You realize that all the GOP has to do is throw a monkey wrench into the blue ribbon commission, force cuts to both spending AND entitlements, and Obama is fucked.

Which with 1:1 defense cuts, they have a reason to negotiate. Which is why it's so important.
I'm waiting on confirmation of this, but if it's in there, something with tax increases might actually occur to prevent military cuts.

 

[eznark]

you realise that there is an automatic trigger to make sure if a wrench is thrown, it will be triggered if a vote is not done.

Said trigger cuts entitlements AND defense, sacred cows of both sides. That's my point.

Which with 1:1 defense cuts, they have a reason to negotiate. Which is why it's so important.

I actually think the entitlement cuts have a far larger political impact that defense spending.

 

[planar1280]

Which with 1:1 defense cuts, they have a reason to negotiate. Which is why it's so important.
I'm waiting on confirmation of this, but if it's in there, something with tax increases might actually occur to prevent military cuts.

precisely, the deal says if the deal is not voted no, an automatic trigger will occur

 

[balladofwindfishes]

does the GOP even really care a lot for the military?

I would have thrown in ending subsidies personally. Those are more in line with Medicare as far as the GOP ideology goes.

It just seems like even if the numbers are the same, the cuts to social programs hurt a lot more and were a bigger concession.

 

[planar1280]

Said trigger cuts entitlements AND defense, sacred cows of both sides. That's my point.



I actually think the entitlement cuts have a far larger political impact that defense spending.

precisely, they will want to vote on something better for both, an incentive on both sides. both right and left extremes will not be satisfied. this seems to be a purely centrist compromise.

 

[teruterubozu]

Since nobody is happy, it must be a good plan.

 

[eznark]

precisely, the deal says if the deal is not voted no, an automatic trigger will occur

My point seems to be flying miles above your head.

Should that trigger be pulled, it causes massive damage to the Democrats and very little to the GOP.

 

[Suikoguy]

does the GOP even really care a lot for the military?

I would have thrown in ending subsidies personally. Those are more in line with Medicare as far as the GOP ideology goes.

It just seems like even if the numbers are the same, the cuts to social programs hurt a lot more and were a bigger concession.

I won't disagree, but military cuts of any kind have been impossible for many years now.

 

[eznark]

I won't disagree, but military cuts of any kind have been impossible for many years now.

Prior to 9/11 there was significant momentum for increased efficiency and accountability in military projects. Rumsfeld was hated for his "progressive" ideas.

That's why the Pentagon had to engineer 9/11.

 

[Oblivion]

They managed to come up with something even I am disgusted with, and I had girded mah loins for a hard right bucket of ugly.

Really? This is pretty bad, but amazingly we've see far worse proposals come out before.

 

[Arrowgigantic]

does the GOP even really care a lot for the military?

The soldiers? No. The rest of the military? Yes.

 

[Pctx]

what are the bullet points of the plan?

 

[Piecake]

You realize that all the GOP has to do is throw a monkey wrench into the blue ribbon commission, force cuts to both spending AND entitlements, and Obama is fucked.

Then have the democrats on the committee disagree with them. Why do you think that Republicans will control the committee? Plus, if the committee fails to come up with a useful option Obama can always just repeal the Bush tax cuts.

While I don't hate the bill, I definitely don't love it either. Bit more hate than love actually, and my hate increase 100 fold if tax increases/reform do not appear in the committee recommendations or Obama fails to repeal the Bush tax cuts

 

[GhaleonEB]

I think the Tea Party will NEVER be satisfied. They just want something to be angry about.

I think the real thought process is:

TP: Does Obama support it?

A: Yes.

TP: Then we're angry! Shut'er down! But keep the guberment mitts off our Medicare!

 

[Y2Kev]

Said trigger cuts entitlements AND defense, sacred cows of both sides. That's my point.



I actually think the entitlement cuts have a far larger political impact that defense spending.

Maybe on the surface. Defense spending is just another entitlement program.

 

[eznark]

Then have the democrats on the committee disagree with them. Why do you think that Republicans will control the committee? Plus, if the committee fails to come up with a useful option Obama can always just repeal the Bush tax cuts.

While I don't hate the bill, I definitely don't love it either. Bit more hate than love actually, and my hate increase 100 fold if tax increases/reform do not appear in the committee recommendations or Obama fails to repeal the Bush tax cuts

Because I have been paying attention during this mess?

And as I understand it, Democrats disagreeing would be a good thing for the GOP. It would gridlock the BRC and force the triggers...which again I think the GOP wants to happen.

I think there is a strong faction within the GOP that wants to find a way to cut military spending but that it's unpalatable. They are the "military" party, can't go soft. This agreement on a trigger allows them to cut both entitlement and defense spending without getting too terribly dirty in the process.

If that's how they play it, this is kind of brilliant on their part. Since it is brilliant, I assume they stumbled ass backwards into it.

TP: Then we're angry! Shut'er down! But keep the guberment mitts off our Medicare!

Tea Party twitter people seem pissed about the impending Obama tax hikes as a result of no deal on the Bush cuts.

 

[Suikoguy]

Maybe on the surface. Defense spending is just another entitlement program.

Yep, it is in multiple ways, both in protection which rich people have more to lose, and employment.

 

[Piecake]

Because I have been paying attention during this mess?

And as I understand it, Democrats disagreeing would be a good thing for the GOP. It would gridlock the BRC and force the triggers...which again I think the GOP wants to happen.

I think there is a strong faction within the GOP that wants to find a way to cut military spending but that it's unpalatable. They are the "military" party, can't go soft. This agreement on a trigger allows them to cut both entitlement and defense spending without getting too terribly dirty in the process.

If that's how they play it, this is kind of brilliant on their part. Since it is brilliant, I assume they stumbled ass backwards into it.



Tea Party twitter people seem pissed about the impending Obama tax hikes as a result of no deal on the Bush cuts.

You're just guessing that some of the republicans want to cut military spending even though no republican has really talked about it? I find that pretty ridiculous.

 

[Trouble]

Since nobody is happy, it must be a good plan.

Seems like the best deal that has a chance of getting to Obama's desk. I'm still not convinced that the tea party dipshits won't fuck this up, though. They seem to just want to watch the whole system burn.

 

[eznark]

You're just guessing that some of the republicans want to cut military spending even though no republican has really talked about it? I find that pretty ridiculous.

Like I said, there was a strong bi-partisan push to bring more accountability to the defense budget pre-9/11. It's maybe a guess, but it's not pulled out of thin air.

 

[Piecake]

Like I said, there was a strong bi-partisan push to bring more accountability to the defense budget pre-9/11. It's maybe a guess, but it's not pulled out of thin air.

Well, Republicans were actually somewhat rational then. I mean, if republicans now were like the first George Bush, we would be in a much better place

 

[SoulPlaya]

I guess this means that the Bush tax cuts are getting extended. The punishment for lack of "tax reform" is Obama threatening to veto an extension of the Bush tax cuts, which means that "tax reform" and Bush tax cuts are completely compatible. That probably means that "tax reform" simply means getting rid of some incentives.

 

[planar1280]

It seems to be a plan which is sort of a compromise to get time to get Tea Party Republicans defeated in November 2012. There will be a lot of backlash by progressives against Obama but there will be a bigger backlash by true republicans against Tea Party members.

 

[XMonkey]

Like I said, there was a strong bi-partisan push to bring more accountability to the defense budget pre-9/11. It's maybe a guess, but it's not pulled out of thin air.

Pre-9/11 was a very different place...

 

[Y2Kev]

What do "cuts to Medicare" ultimately mean? Since everyone is getting covered, does it mean less is paid for? Or does it just negotiate lower rates? I don't understand the ultimate impact.

 

[Puddles]

Okay, that's NOT good.

 

[eznark]

Well, Republicans were actually somewhat rational then. I mean, if republicans now were like the first George Bush, we would be in a much better place

Right, and my point is many of those guys are still there. I'm guessing that at least a handful of the "small government" tea party types would be on board as well.

Also, there is tons and tons and tons of bloat. You can meet the trigger requirements and never touch domestic defense spending. Social security and such on the other hand, that's going to be felt at home.

 

[Piecake]

I guess this means that the Bush tax cuts are getting extended. The punishment for lack of "tax reform" is Obama threatening to veto an extension of the Bush tax cuts, which means that "tax reform" and Bush tax cuts are completely compatible. That probably means that "tax reform" simply means getting rid of some incentives.

Eh, hopefully how it works out is that the Bush tax cuts stay around for the middle class, but the rich get pushed back to the Clinton era and their capital gains tax gets pushed even further when it was 28%

 

[SoulPlaya]

What do "cuts to Medicare" ultimately mean? Since everyone is getting covered, does it mean less is paid for? Or does it just negotiate lower rates? I don't understand the ultimate impact.

I don't understand what you mean by "everyone is getting covered"? What it means is that providers will get lower reimbursement, probably. Unfortunately, it's usually providers to the poor or in rural targets that are the most harshly targeted with these lower reimbursements.

 

[Chichikov]

What do "cuts to Medicare" ultimately mean? Since everyone is getting covered, does it mean less is paid for? Or does it just negotiate lower rates? I don't understand the ultimate impact.

Probably raising the eligibility age.
Or maybe means testing.

 

[Bishman]

 

[ZedIndyLil]

Hi, PoliGAF!

Terrible plan. Terrible on the policy, process, and politics. We now have a government of austerity and permanent crisis fully endorsed by both parties.

And please don't try to 11-dimensional-chess-ify this one. Obama is just trolling traditional Dems now.

 

[Salazar]

What services (nominally) receive all that Defense spending ?

 

[GaimeGuy]

What do "cuts to Medicare" ultimately mean? Since everyone is getting covered, does it mean less is paid for? Or does it just negotiate lower rates? I don't understand the ultimate impact.

the cuts seem tobe purely on the provider side

 

[pestul]

So.. AAA downgrade all but confirmed still? That would suck if true.

 

[Piecake]

So.. AAA downgrade all but confirmed still? That would suck if true.

doesnt look like it

 

[eznark]

Why are there no "I won't bore you with the details" jokes going on right now. That should have caught on!!!

So.. AAA downgrade all but confirmed still? That would suck if true.

Over Zandi's dead body

 

[mcnutty]

What do "cuts to Medicare" ultimately mean? Since everyone is getting covered, does it mean less is paid for? Or does it just negotiate lower rates? I don't understand the ultimate impact.

they're reducing provider payments, so if say normally a provider was reimbursed $20,000 to perform a certain type of surgery, now it'll be $18,000 (Or maybe just slow the rate of growth I'm not sure). Reductions to this were in the healthcare reform plan as well, though presumably the triggered cuts would be more drastic.

 

[MechaX]

Absolutely outstanding. We get some Franken-bill that absolutely no one is really happy about.

But assuming that Tea Partiers still try to shit in the bed with this one even tonight, how screwed will we be on a scale of 1-10?

 

[Ezduo]

Who was the guy on CNN promising to try and filibuster this?

 

[SlipperySlope]

Seems like the best deal that has a chance of getting to Obama's desk. I'm still not convinced that the tea party dipshits won't fuck this up, though. They seem to just want to watch the whole system burn.

If enough Democrats in the House vote for it, the Tea Party will be useless in stopping it.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Absolutely outstanding. We get some Franken-bill that absolutely no one is really happy about.

But assuming that Tea Partiers still try to shit in the bed with this one even tonight, how screwed will we be on a scale of 1-10?

9.8

 

[eznark]

Absolutely outstanding. We get some Franken-bill that absolutely no one is really happy about.

But assuming that Tea Partiers still try to shit in the bed with this one even tonight, how screwed will we be on a scale of 1-10?

Sources on the Boehner conference call say that there is essentially zero objections at this point.

But isn't Pelosi on board? There will be plenty of democrats for this bill.

 

[SlipperySlope]

Who was the guy on CNN promising to try and filibuster this?

Might be difficult to get 40 people to filibuster it when you have the majority and minority Senate leaders for it.

 

[Plumbob]

But isn't Pelosi on board? There will be plenty of democrats for this bill.

I mean if she isn't, boo freakin hoo. Her objections won't outweigh the importance of raising the ceiling

 

[SoulPlaya]

they're reducing provider payments, so if say normally a provider was reimbursed $20,000 to perform a certain type of surgery, now it'll be $18,000 (Or maybe just slow the rate of growth I'm not sure). Reductions to this were in the healthcare reform plan as well, though presumably the triggered cuts would be more drastic.

I seriously hope it's just a slowdown on the rate growth, and that it's not on top of the cuts already in place in the healthcare reform. Yes, I know people hate healthcare providers, but medicare needs to pay well, and healthcare is one of the few areas experiencing real job growth. Many may call it an unsustainable bubble, but in order to cut costs, the way medicine is treated in this country (such as true universal healthcare) needs to be provided, not just occasional cuts to providers.

 

[Piecake]

I mean if she isn't, boo freakin hoo. Her objections won't outweigh the importance of raising the ceiling

Obama can still go 14th amendment on its ass if the bill is rejected

 

[Y2Kev]

I don't understand what you mean by "everyone is getting covered"? What it means is that providers will get lower reimbursement, probably. Unfortunately, it's usually providers to the poor or in rural targets that are the most harshly targeted with these lower reimbursements.

I mean that all oldies are going to still be covered. Provider payments being cut means what for beneficiaries-- fewer providers will take medicare? Otherwise, wouldn't this maybe slow the cost growth of healthcare and not be all bad?

 

[pestul]

Obama can still go 14th amendment on its ass if the bill is rejected

I hope it doesn't come to that. Tea Party supporters would go apeshit crazy. Also, credit rating would go down due to lack of confidence in US policy makers.

 

[Wall]

So.. AAA downgrade all but confirmed still? That would suck if true.

Its honestly the least of our worries at this point. They downgraded Japanese debt several times throughout the past decade, and that government is still able to borrow at historic lows. The reason probably is that nobody really takes them seriously. They were busy slapping AAA ratings on mortgage backed securities right up until they nearly brought down the entire economy because it turned out that they were worthless. Any economic impact would most probably be extremely short term, and politically would be more embarrassing than anything else.

We should be worried that the cuts, combined with the slowing of the economy already occurring due to the pre-mature withdrawal of the stimulus, will plunge us back into a recession.