This fiscal cliff is the Republicancs doing. They steadfastly refuse to raise taxes on the very rich in return for meaningful spending cuts the Democrats have agreed to. Boehner & company need to step up & work with Pres Obama for a reasonable budget that’ll keep the economy from going back into recession.
lonecat over 11 years ago
There’s just as much reality in the fiscal cliff as there is in Skyfall.
Dapperdan61 Premium Member over 11 years ago
This fiscal cliff is the Republicancs doing. They steadfastly refuse to raise taxes on the very rich in return for meaningful spending cuts the Democrats have agreed to. Boehner & company need to step up & work with Pres Obama for a reasonable budget that’ll keep the economy from going back into recession.
frodo1008 over 11 years ago
If the American people were going to blame President Obama for everything, (including the Fiscal Cliff), then Mitt Romney would be the next President!
However….
oneoldhat over 11 years ago
ansnia do you not know everything is bush fault benghazi , pearl harbor , etc
Dtroutma over 11 years ago
The “cliff” is a Boehner creation, it’s time for HIM to finally compromise, and realize the nation is more important than the “party”.
Mickey 13 over 11 years ago
NON PARTISAN DEFINITION OF “THE FISCAL CLIFF.”
Read this link, it’s a bit long but thorough.
http://bonds.about.com/od/Issues-in-the-News/a/What-Is-The-Fiscal-Cliff.htm
Mickey 13 over 11 years ago
Quit worrying about who is to blame and concentrate on the issues. These are the major points involved.
http://bonds.about.com/od/Issues-in-the-News/a/What-Is-The-Fiscal-Cliff.htm
ninety_nine_percent over 11 years ago
What a Payne you are, BS on you — the GOP created the fiscal cliff.
dannysixpack over 11 years ago
what interesting is we are still buying the framework of taxing the wealthy more heavily. the real question is more heavily than what?
everyone pays the same taxes up to 250k. for money earned over that amount taxes go down.
why should the tax rate on the first 250 be higher than the taxes on the subsequent 250+.
wouldn’t it be equitable and turn that around? tax the first 250k less than the subsequent 250+.?