A technical guide to cliff-jumping, fiscal and otherwise
"Oh no, we're going over the edge and I'm not driving!!!"
Hi ho, hi ho, it’s off the fiscal cliff we go ….
Yes, it’s still pretty early in the process. Negotiators in Washington are several weeks from the deadline for averting the so-called fiscal cliff, which would automatically kick in some $600 billion in tax hikes and spending cuts. But so far, neither side is willing to take the steps necessary to alter course. U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina predicted over the weekend that “we’re going over the cliff,” and it wouldn’t be a surprise if he turns out to be right.
In preparation for that moment, I thought it might be timely to review five classic examples of cliff-jumping, including a brief analysis of the techniques, motivations and survival strategies, if any, involved in each.
1. The iconic “Thelma and Louise:”
The “Thelma and Louise” is a grand philosophical gesture. It makes a statement to the world that life as we had previously known it just isn’t worth living any longer, so what the hell, right? Put the pedal to the metal and let’s see what happens.
A surprising number of those in Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, have apparently joined the “Thelma and Louise Caucus,” raising the odds that we’ll be going over the edge in spectacular style. As Louise told Thelma, “You’ve always been crazy. This is just the first chance you’ve had to express yourself.”
Among other things, it’s a terrible waste of a 1966 Thunderbird convertible.
2. The “Wile E. Coyote”:
Wile E. Coyote is obsessed with catching the Roadrunner, but in the end is always frustrated by his own incompetence and bungling. Quite often, his dreams and plans involve mail-order Acme products, such as Acme rockets, Acme earthquake pills or, in the case of the 2012 GOP campaign, Acme polling and Acme Senate candidates.
The good news is that the Coyote is indestructible. After every failed attempt — most of which involve long, painful falls off a cliff — he picks himself up and tries again. The bad news is, he never seems to learn that doing the same thing over and over again only ensures that you keep getting the same bad results. That is both his charm and his fatal flaw.
3. The Acalpulco Cliff Diver:
The secret to surviving this form of cliff-diving is timing. If you launch your dive at the proper moment, as the ocean waves are surging in toward you, there will be enough water in the bay below to allow a safe entry. However, if you time it wrong — if you jump just as the waves are washing back out to sea — you can find yourself diving headfirst into the rocks below, and the results ain’t pretty.
I think there’s a lesson there, Speaker Boehner.
4. “The Buffalo Jump”:
In the days before the arrival of the horse in North America, Native American tribesmen would whip herds of buffalo into a fearful frenzy and then stampede the herd into jumping off a nearby cliff, where they became easy pickings. And if you think about it, frightening others into jumping off a cliff en masse remains a great business model. Just ask Rush Limbaugh, Grover Norquist and Fox News.
5. “BASE jumping:”
BASE is an acronym for Buildings, Antennas, Spans (such as bridges), and Earth (cliffs), all of which become launching points for daredevil jumpers. Early BASE-jumping pioneers used parachutes to break their falls, but as seen in the video above, the latest innovation is wingsuits (no, not this kind of wingsuit), which turn the jumper into the equivalent of Rocket J. Squirrel.
Like Thelma and Louise, base jumpers go over the edge on purpose. Like Wile E. Coyote, base jumpers do a lot of careful planning. (They do not, however, order their equipment from Acme.) And like the Acalpulco cliff divers, base jumpers have every intention of surviving, and they do … most of the time, anyway.
It remains, however, very dangerous and is not for the faint of heart.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
315 comments Add your comment
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
1:51 pm
Fred
” My first instinct is to distrust it because it’s from Ralph Nader who is a communist isn’t he? (Didn’t he run for President once under the Communist Party? I may be wrong but that seems to stick in my mind). Also I don’t know enough about it to make an informed judgement BUT……..
At 1/2 or 1 cent like either you or the article said (I read it the first time you posted it), it sounds like a pretty damn good idea. Like oyu, I’m curious to see if Jay responds.”
No, he isn’t a communist or a socialist or a rightwinger or any of the other categories people like to slot others into so they can label them and dismiss them (not directed at you, just an observation on how some operate). Nader’s an independent. Has had several runs for President. Democrats had been even more active in shutting him out of the electoral process than Republicans.
That idea was floated years ago, around the time of the financial meltdown, I think. Nader’s point was to let those engaged in the industry pay for cleanup when things went wrong, not to dump it all on the taxpayers. I believe he envisioned a fund that would be tapped when such things happen again. Of course, Democrats AND Republicans opposed the idea.
Wall Street doesn’t give all that much money to people like Nader who believe in accountability and paying for your own sins.
Thulsa Doom
December 3rd, 2012
1:53 pm
Going over the cliff? Sounds like what the Bama offensive line did to the Georgia defense. They steamrolled them and pushed em right over a cliff.
Corbin Sharpe. Baby Boomer leech...and earned it!
December 3rd, 2012
1:54 pm
Halftrack is going off half cocked…
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
1:54 pm
Halftrack
December 3rd, 2012
1:48 pm
Obummer thinks that going off the cliff is with a bungie cord attached and the more you spend and tax you will be jerked right back up. It is the taxpayer that gets jerked around and we have to pay the fiddler to the “tune” of 16 + trillion dollars.
++++++++++++++++++++
I love it when the kids get alt’s use “cutsie” little talk radio insult names for the most powerful man on the face of the earth, and repeat the same lies. It’s so “clever”.
YouLibs
December 3rd, 2012
1:54 pm
Thelma
Saban knows he was five seconds and five yards away from a second-tier bowl game. They should put a statue of Chris Conley right next to the Saban statue on campus.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 3rd, 2012
1:54 pm
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
1:41 pm
Why can’t those making over 50K pay another 100 bucks or so in…progessive to those making up to 250K..max would be say 1K annually? Seems everyone of any means needs to be vested in fixing this mess…this in addition to material spending cuts, gradual increase of tax rate on those over 250K…stay away from cap gains and dividends..
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
1:55 pm
Thulsa – that referee double standard on the late quarterback hits didn’t help.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 3rd, 2012
1:57 pm
Thulsa Doom
December 3rd, 2012
1:53 pm
True but our tatooing of UA for 28 points and the game ending on the 5 yard line doesn’t suggest (oddly enough) that the ground game of bama (it seems they ran for over 1000 yds) was enough to put the game away until time expired at the 5…
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
1:58 pm
Oscar, a couple with $300,000 in taxable income would pay an additional $15k, not $2k.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 3rd, 2012
2:01 pm
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
1:51 pm
IMO, Nader hasn’t said anything politically relevent since he arrived on the scene in the 70’s I think. This idea has been tossed around much to the chagrin of DEMS and GOP who get cash from Wall St. But taking the Las Vegas style betting out can make differences for the individual long term investor as well as tax collections.
The problem is that Goldmann runs the government and would likely get another home-boy on the cabinet or the like and make sure that doesn’t happen…
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:01 pm
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
1:55 pm
Thulsa – that referee double standard on the late quarterback hits didn’t help.
+++++++++++++++++
Meh. It didn’t hurt so much either maybe. What killed us was the typical Mark Richt team that has a lack of discipline and self discipline. We were out coached period. Mark Richt will NEVER win a National Championship and it’s looking a lot like he’ll never win another SEC championship unless the other teams bus blows up on the way to the game killing the entire team.
Joe Hussein Mama
December 3rd, 2012
2:02 pm
N. Yobinnes — “Oscar, a couple with $300,000 in taxable income would pay an additional $15k, not $2k.”
No. Oscar is correct.
You’d calculate the increased taxation on the portion of income *over* $250K, not on the whole amount.
N-GA (on the winning side 2 federal elections in a row!)
December 3rd, 2012
2:02 pm
Since the House of Representatives seems to have the time to re-visit the Affordable Healthcare Act 30+ times, let me suggest this:
Start at annual income of $100,000 and vote on a bill to extend the Bush tax cuts. Keep doing that in $10,000 increments. Stop when the first vote fails to pass. I think the GOP would call those “up-or-down” votes, right?
Oscar
December 3rd, 2012
2:04 pm
Nunna Yobinnes = four per cent of $50,000 is $2,000. What am I missing here.
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:06 pm
Nunna
“Oscar, a couple with $300,000 in taxable income would pay an additional $15k, not $2k.”
Just how on earth did you calculate that?
That couple would be in the second-top tier. The amount over $250k adjusted would be taxed an additional 3 percent marginal. That’s after deductions, not gross income. $300k minus $250K = $50K times .03 yields $1,500, not $15,000.
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:07 pm
My wife stiffed me on going to lunch and I’m starving. Should I distract her and then delete the paper she’s writing lol?
JohnnyReb
December 3rd, 2012
2:07 pm
I notice a few Moonbats have convenient memory. Let’s review.
W kept the econonomy out of the toilet after 9/11.
I believe every Senator voted to go war but one, the current jackass in the oval office.
That same oval office occupier failed to reach an agreement with Iraq for us to have a base of opearation which, for those in la la land, means the lives, limbs, and money was pretty much for naught.
The current oval office occupier ramped up the war in Afghanistan. I don’t ever read about the money he is spending there. W on the otherhand had enough sense to know a big war there would be a failure.
Oh I know. GM survived and OBL died. Keep believing that BS. The jury is stil out on GM. If they survive it will be because Barry forgives their current debt, and/or the IRS forgives their back taxes. And, they hire someone who can engineer a car to world class standards.
As to OBL, give little Barry credit for pulling the trigger. At least he has had one foreign policy achievement that worked.
Thulsa Doom
December 3rd, 2012
2:08 pm
Dawg fans got more excuses than Jimmy carter has peanuts. Every break in the game went the Dawgs way and they still got beat. They get a cheap td on a kick block following a bs tipping call, bama mismanaged the clock to end the first half, we threw an int into the end zone, we let the clock expire on a fake kick that would have worked while uga has a lucky conversion on their fake kick. The only thing that even made that game close was bamas various miscues. Statistically and on the field it was a one sided a$$kicking with Georgia supplying the a$$.
N-GA (on the winning side 2 federal elections in a row!)
December 3rd, 2012
2:08 pm
Nunna is using that old Republican arithmetic.
Tundra Dude
December 3rd, 2012
2:09 pm
A technical guide to cliff-jumping, fiscal and otherwise
Simple solution: Just repeal that Budget Control Act of 2011
(If they’d stop manufacturing these Cliffs and Ceilings there wouldn’t be a crisis)
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:10 pm
1999 tax (next to last year of Clinton admin) ($300,000 – 283,150) x 39.6% + 85,288.50) = $91,691.
2011 tax (next to last year of “Bush tax cuts”) ($212,300 x 33%)-22,545.30 = $76,455. Tax increase = $15,506. Not $2,000.
JohnnyReb
December 3rd, 2012
2:10 pm
To the topic at hand – one can state Republicans are not serious about solving the mess, but the facts are -
Republicans are not proposing ridiculous things like paying off peoples mortgage, forgiving student loans, having another Stimulus spending, and letting Obama raise the debt limit anytime he wishes without getting Congressional approval.
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:11 pm
Afternoon, JHM
Amazing, isn’t it? People spend all this time on this blog, telling everyone what ‘is’ regarding tax proposals (especially when it comes to what ‘the other side’ really means) and after all this time they still don’t even understand the concept of marginal rates…….
It’s like someone sitting thru a whole semester of a geology class and just before the final saying to the professor “what was the name of the period where humans lived with the t-rexes, not just the allosauruses?”
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:11 pm
Paul and Joe – Ignoring the changes in tax brackets aren’t you? See my illustration above.
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:12 pm
JohnnyReb
December 3rd, 2012
2:10 pm
To the topic at hand – one can state Republicans are not serious about solving the mess, but the facts are -
Republicans are not proposing ridiculous things like paying off peoples mortgage, forgiving student loans, having another Stimulus spending, and letting Obama raise the debt limit anytime he wishes without getting Congressional approval.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neither is the President. Only Rush and Fox says that……. well and you……
Butch
December 3rd, 2012
2:12 pm
I skimmed through quick so maybe I missed it, but has anyone defined the spending cuts that have been proposed by the administration? Lots of talk about revenue, but I saw Geithner on the weekend shows and he talked about permanently removing the debt limit, $600B in stimulus, etc…..no specifics about spending…..lots of rhetoric about taxes. I think we can all agree, taxes are going up…..that’s fine…..but no talk of spending cuts?
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:12 pm
Paul, I understand marginal rates. I also understand tax brackets, which apparently you do not.
Peadawg
December 3rd, 2012
2:12 pm
“Every break in the game went the Dawgs way”
These 2 come to mind:
1. The vicious head-to-head hit on Murray
2. The “pass interference” call on UGA on 3rd down when the ball was 5 yards over his head.
Those certainly didn’t go our way.
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:13 pm
Fred
“Should I distract her and then delete the paper she’s writing lol?”
What’s the one thing a husband never wants to hear when he’s arguing with his wife? (or in your case, done something like that)
“Just remember…. you have to fall asleep sometime….”
Tundra Dude
December 3rd, 2012
2:14 pm
it’s like someone sitting thru a whole semester of a geology class and just before the final saying to the professor “what was the name of the period where humans lived with the t-rexes, not just the allosauruses?”
LOL!!! Stop it, man, yer killin’ me!!!
(bestest laff in a long time)
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 3rd, 2012
2:15 pm
“Just remember…. you have to fall asleep sometime….”
And I thought it was “Just remember Lorena Bobbit.”
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:15 pm
JohnnyReb
“W kept the econonomy out of the toilet after 9/11.”
In what space-time continuum did the crash of 2008 occur before Sep 11, 2001?
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:15 pm
Butch
December 3rd, 2012
2:12 pm
I skimmed through quick so maybe I missed it, but has anyone defined the spending cuts that have been proposed by the administration? Lots of talk about revenue, but I saw Geithner on the weekend shows and he talked about permanently removing the debt limit, $600B in stimulus, etc…..no specifics about spending…..lots of rhetoric about taxes. I think we can all agree, taxes are going up…..that’s fine…..but no talk of spending cuts?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
And on FOX you won’t see anything about cuts. but then the truth is, as long as the Republicans flatly state they won’t do any tax raising, there doesn’t need to BE anything on spending cuts. It won’t matter as long as they fail to negotiate. Once they come to the table to REALISTICALLY talk, then we’ll hear about the cuts.
What’s so hard to understand about that? You don’t give a counter offer until you have received an offer. In an action, you don’t raise your own bid………
AmericaShrugged
December 3rd, 2012
2:16 pm
We deserve the cliff. We allow our elected representatives to represent little more than themselves. Does it seem reasonable, fair or even sane, that we should pay for them to have pension and healthcare plans separate from Obamacare, Medicare and SS?
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:16 pm
too bad Paul ignores facts in favor of funny stories. Gee, if I had told a lie, I’d never hear the end of it.
Thulsa Doom
December 3rd, 2012
2:17 pm
Nunna yobusiness,
Doesnt sound like you understand football very well. When AJ got hit it was a late hit and head to head. When Murray threw an int he then became a defender and thus fair game to be blocked. Big difference which the dawg fans seem unable to discern. And if you’re going to start it off with the blows to the head by your defensive players then guess whats going to happen? That play had no bearing on the game anyway. Instead of making a fg from the 5 which was right down the middle we would have just made it from the 20. Bunch a whining about nothing.
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:17 pm
LOl Sorry butch, that should have been an AUCTION not an action…….
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:18 pm
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:16 pm
too bad Paul ignores facts in favor of funny stories. Gee, if I had told a lie, I’d never hear the end of it.
++++++++++++++++
When haven’t you lied? I’ve pointed out two or three this thread alone……….
oops
December 3rd, 2012
2:18 pm
oh look. it can be done.
FL’s debt clock is….. going DOWN? Good job Republican Rick Scott.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/state-debt-clocks/state-of-florida-debt-clock.html
Tundra Dude
December 3rd, 2012
2:19 pm
My wife stiffed me on going to lunch and I’m starving
I stiffed my gf, she’s taking me out to lunch.
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:19 pm
I didn’t lie. Show me the error in my calculations. You can’t.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 3rd, 2012
2:20 pm
Jerome
RA is quickly running out of 1st class managers to fire. If he starts in on the 2nd tier, then we will quickly be out of the EPL.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fred
A red card in U12?
Must be a fan of Elizabeth Lambert.
Check this out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvEobeNfGcc
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:21 pm
Well Paul, when are you going to admit you were wrong?
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:21 pm
Nunna
Let me see if I understand this.
You’re arguing that the relevant time period to calculate differentials is not what the Pres campaigned on – top-tier increases by 3% and 4.6% – but on rates going back over a decade?
“999 tax (next to last year of Clinton admin) ($300,000 – 283,150) x 39.6% + 85,288.50) = $91,691.
2011 tax (next to last year of “Bush tax cuts”) ($212,300 x 33%)-22,545.30 = $76,455. Tax increase = $15,506. Not $2,000.”
Nunna, do you see the difference in your formulas from 1999 to 2011? Not the numbers, but the structure? Hint: for 2011, no one in the next to highest bracket pays 33% on their entire adjusted gross income.
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:22 pm
Woo Hoo. I just got a check for $104.54 for my oil well. I’m RICH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:22 pm
Thulsa, you know for a fact that the hit on Murray occurred after the interception?
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 3rd, 2012
2:23 pm
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
1:58 pm
Great…so $1250 a month to start on taxable income at 300K..not including if any deductions are removed…that number can quickly get up to 1750 or more a month…we get screwed..what about those who have homes materially underwater, taking care of parents, kids in college and the like who are thin on discretionary cash?
I guess these “rich taxpayers” all manage their money perfectly, live at least a couple thousand a month below their means and the like.
This is where that anger comes in…this “they can afford it” and “fair share” garbage are simply political gamesmanship toward class warfare..
If these are instituted over time and NO NEW SPENDING regardless is undertaken, some may be won over…if not, this direct transfer of money from those of us who pay material taxes to support unsustainable can-kicking will take other measures to protect our money..
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:23 pm
Okay, Tundra 2:11, that was great, too!
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:24 pm
I compared taxes for the same situation for 1999 versus 2011. My understanding is that taxes were to return to the Clinton era taxes. That being the case, taxes for a couple with $300,000 in taxable income will pay $15,506 more in tax.
Butch
December 3rd, 2012
2:24 pm
Fred
“And on FOX you won’t see anything about cuts. but then the truth is, as long as the Republicans flatly state they won’t do any tax raising, there doesn’t need to BE anything on spending cuts. It won’t matter as long as they fail to negotiate. Once they come to the table to REALISTICALLY talk, then we’ll hear about the cuts.
What’s so hard to understand about that? You don’t give a counter offer until you have received an offer. In an action, you don’t raise your own bid………”
I get it…..but on the other hand, why negotiate on revenues until you get some give on spending?…..cuts both ways.
Until both sides stop campaigning, this BS will continue. I don’t have the answer but I am sure term limits are a good place to start.
Not sure what FOX has to do with this…..
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:25 pm
Kam: I can’t BELIEVE you posted that BS. Elizabeth was victimized by the whole BYU team and then smeared by ESPN. Did you actually WATCH that video? She had her hair pulled viciously, had another tramp punch her in the groin, another one elbowed her in the stomach.
I thought that the play and conduct of the BYU players was deplorable and I wrote BYU and told them so. How did YOU get duped?
Boris Badnoff
December 3rd, 2012
2:26 pm
Upon reading Jay Bookman’s excellent nonpartisan analysis, I broke down and openly wept because I realize that I am the problem. I’m just not paying enough in taxes. Immediately I opened my wallet and put the contents in an envelope and sent it to Washington. Without Jay’s guidance I might have squandered it on foolish frivolities such as food and shelter. Of course we all need to pay more taxes. Our Beloved Messiah is getting ready for his annual vacation to the island nation of Hawaii which costs $ 4 million in taxes.
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/with-more-vacation-days-and-separate-travel-price-of-obama%E2%80%99s-annual-hawaiian-holiday-rises/123
Those trouble making rascally Republicans are making snide remarks such as what is he taking a vacation from? All he ever does is play golf. And he could take a vacation in Chattanooga and see 57 states from Rock City and stay at the palatial Motel 666 for only slight less than what Jay Bookman spends each month on hair grooming products. Have these people no shame? Golf is exhausting. You have to select which club and decide whether to tip the caddy or simply point out that serving a living god is payment enough. Certainly, $ 4 million is a pittance and we must make sure Our Beloved Messiah is thoroughly rested in case he ever has to do something.
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:27 pm
The oversimplistic results in changes in marginal rates have less bearing on the tax calculation than the changes in tax brackets.
Oscar
December 3rd, 2012
2:28 pm
Nunna- I get the point about tax brackets, but I don’t believe your figures are correct.
Taxes on the 1999 amount up to 283,150 would not be anywhere as high as you say they are in your calculation.
Dr. Freud
December 3rd, 2012
2:28 pm
I have been working on a new hypothesis — and the Congress of the United States seems to merit close observation.
My hypothesis? Simply put, that mental illness is contagious. And, if one associates with those who are mentally ill, the chances are the crazy behavior will be replicated.
Close scrutiny of the Congress of the United States since 2010, shows we’re pretty close to proving the hypothesis is correct.
Joe Hussein Mama
December 3rd, 2012
2:28 pm
J. Reb — “I notice a few Moonbats have convenient memory. Let’s review.”
I notice your head’s stuck in your third point of contact again. Let’s pull it out and clean out your ears.
“W kept the econonomy out of the toilet after 9/11.”
Via blowing a modest budget surplus and massive deficit spending, which, as our VP told us at the time, ‘didn’t matter.’
“I believe every Senator voted to go war but one, the current jackass in the oval office.”
And I reserve special scorn for every one of them — Republican or Democrat — who voted to cede their authority to the President.
“That same oval office occupier failed to reach an agreement with Iraq for us to have a base of opearation which, for those in la la land, means the lives, limbs, and money was pretty much for naught.”
Somehow, it escapes you that the *invasion* was for naught, too. Besides, since Iraq hadn’t attacked us, didn’t have WMD and was *complying* with UN weapons inspectors, we had no cause for action there.
“The current oval office occupier ramped up the war in Afghanistan. I don’t ever read about the money he is spending there. W on the otherhand had enough sense to know a big war there would be a failure.”
President Bush stupidly wasted time, money, materiel and LIVES in a pointless Iraq adventure when the mastermind behind 9/11 was safely in hiding in Afghanistan. If terror attacks were the reason for launching the war, President Bush clearly took his eyes off the target. Plus, during all this fooferaw, the North Koreans managed to GET THE BOMB — and yet we heard no Republican hue-and-cry about those WMDs. Conclusion — Republican objections to Iraqi WMDs were a convenient and transparent excuse for invasion.
“Oh I know. GM survived and OBL died. Keep believing that BS. The jury is stil out on GM. If they survive it will be because Barry forgives their current debt, and/or the IRS forgives their back taxes. And, they hire someone who can engineer a car to world class standards.”
Your bleating complaint has been noted and dismissed.
“As to OBL, give little Barry credit for pulling the trigger. At least he has had one foreign policy achievement that worked.”
It took Obama to do what Bush couldn’t or wouldn’t do.
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:29 pm
Nunna
Admit I’m wrong about what?
Oscar had written “A four per cent increase means someone making 300,000 would pay an additional $2000 in taxes.” and “Nunna Yobinnes = four per cent of $50,000 is $2,000. What am I missing here.”
You wrote “You very clearly stated “Oscar, a couple with $300,000 in taxable income would pay an additional $15k, not $2k.”
I pointed out the increased taxes under the marginal increase was $1.5K.
Your response about the Clinton rates was…. well…. not accurate. Or relevant.
TaxPayer
December 3rd, 2012
2:29 pm
Using Republican faith-based math rules, you’re allowed to arbitrarily change any numbers in order to achieve the end result you want. Wow. If only that strategy had worked for Karl Rove, Mitt would be president.
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:29 pm
Go to the IRS website, and look at the instructions for Form 1040. They are where I got the tax calculation formulas.
Joe Hussein Mama
December 3rd, 2012
2:30 pm
N. Yobinnes — “Paul and Joe – Ignoring the changes in tax brackets aren’t you? See my illustration above.”
Cart before the horse, aren’t you?
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:30 pm
Nunna
Third paragraph, delete “You wrote” from that.
Joe Hussein Mama
December 3rd, 2012
2:31 pm
N. Yobinnes — “I didn’t lie.”
You certainly did when you defended Wilbur.
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:31 pm
Sure Paul. You keep on ignoring the facts. There is more to the changes than marginal rate increases. To ignore that is being dishonest.
Oscar
December 3rd, 2012
2:31 pm
Nunna – I will check it out.
TaxPayer
December 3rd, 2012
2:32 pm
Where’s Ben hanging out these days. Ben. Ben! BEN! Where are you Ben.
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:33 pm
Nunna
“I compared taxes for the same situation for 1999 versus 2011. My understanding is that taxes were to return to the Clinton era taxes. That being the case, taxes for a couple with $300,000 in taxable income will pay $15,506 more in tax.”
The marginal rates for the bracket you’re speaking of are proposed to increase 3.6%
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/insights/article/tax-outlook-09172012
Fred ™
December 3rd, 2012
2:33 pm
I see Nunnya has “conveniently” ignored my tax plan that he said I didn’t have lol, much less admit he was dead ass wrong.
Tom Middleton
December 3rd, 2012
2:33 pm
How about if we get “Filibuster Mitch McConnell” and “Weeping John Boehner” to jump off a high dive into six inches of water, like at a circus? Oh, nevermind. With our luck they’d land in elephant sh*t and come out like they already are!
Thulsa Doom
December 3rd, 2012
2:33 pm
Nunna yobusiness,
Yes. The hit on Murray occurred after the int and i believe the commentators pointed that out. And you can tell from the movement of the players on both sides it was post int. Quinton dial hit him shoulder length and it dragged his shoulder up to where it hit murrays head so its possible he could have been called for unsportsmanlike. Except that the ref standing right there viewing it didn’t think so. The commentators comments weren’t that it was a late hit but that it was head to head. A lot of stuff wasn’t called in that game. For the most part they just let them play.
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:33 pm
Joe – “Cart before the horse, aren’t you?” How do you figure that? I stated that taxes for a couple with $300,000 would increase by $15k, not $2k as Paul had declared. Clearly the illustration proves he was either misinformed or being dishonest.
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:35 pm
Fred – your tax plan? I don’t think that your plan or my plan really matter, it’s up to congress.
Ken
December 3rd, 2012
2:36 pm
Just another Obama train wreck.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 3rd, 2012
2:36 pm
Opps..I guess I need to check the math..let’s see..I have to do 180 here…I’m reading that in that bracket the additonal tax is 200-300 per month…before any deductions worth about 24-3600 per year..another and possibly more significant cost is if AMT is reduced and /or mortgage deduction is capped…will check..
Forgive my premature postulation prior..
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 3rd, 2012
2:37 pm
Fred
It’s usually the retaliation that get punished.
I remember the first season of the WUSA when Julie Foudy was picking on Homare Sawa (who is all of 5′ 5″ and maybe 100 lbs soaking wet) all game long. About the 85th minute, I turned to my friend and said “Cindy Parlow has had just about enough of this” and sure enough about 2 minutes later, Cindy threw an elbow and knocked Foudy out.
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:39 pm
Nunna
” There is more to the changes than marginal rate increases”
Irrelevant.
The point under discussion is how much would a couple with an income (agi assumed) earning $300,000 a year see their taxes rise if Pres Obama’s proposal to increase the marginal rate from 33% to 36% for the amount over $250,000?
And it ain’t $15,000.
It’s $1500.
You could have taken the almost graceful way out and said “my finger slipped on the keyboard.” But the fact you continue to maintain it’s really $15,000, or an increase equal to 20 percent of their adjusted gross income, leads me to conclude you really do not have a grasp of the concepts once you deviate from the talking points.
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
2:41 pm
Nunna
My earlier post, correct to read “The marginal rates for the bracket you’re speaking of are proposed to increase from 33% to 36%
Brosephus™
December 3rd, 2012
2:41 pm
W kept the econonomy out of the toilet after 9/11.
I believe every Senator voted to go war but one, the current jackass in the oval office.
Was that “current jackass in office” even in Congress took that vote or are you in need of a Snickers or something to aid that sugar imbalance that’s got your brain fried?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 3rd, 2012
2:41 pm
Looks like the Dems will start tomorrow to force a vote in the house on the Senate passed plan to extend the Bush tax cuts to those making under $250k.
Only needs 218 votes…… only 26 republicans needed. 
Wonder if Boehner can hold the line?
Joe Hussein Mama
December 3rd, 2012
2:43 pm
N. Yobinnes — “How do you figure that? I stated that taxes for a couple with $300,000 would increase by $15k, not $2k as Paul had declared. Clearly the illustration proves he was either misinformed or being dishonest.”
Aren’t you compounding Bush-era tax reform rates *and* the overall tax cuts? Rescinding the Bush-Obama tax cuts won’t automatically reinstitute the Clinton-era tax rates IIRC.
YouLibs
December 3rd, 2012
2:46 pm
If you lean right, you probably shouldn’t watch this:
Robert Reich: The Fiscal Cliff in Two Minutes and Thirty Seconds
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/fiscal-cliff-video_b_2232549.html
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:50 pm
Ok, assuming that the information in Paul’s link is correct and will not be revised by congress at the last minute, the “2012 tax” is $75,906 versus $85,068. Increase is “only” $9,162. Still a whole lot more than $2,000.
Oscar
December 3rd, 2012
2:52 pm
This discussion over what the tax increase will be is a good example of why our tax code is too complex and needs to be more simple.
Anyone should be able to figure their own taxes.
And all deductions/loopholes and credits should be eliminated.
Especially the mortgage interest deduction.
And why do we keep paying people to have more children.
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
2:55 pm
Oscar – good question. However, that applies to public assistance as well as personal exemptions.
Erwin's cat
December 3rd, 2012
2:55 pm
Especially the mortgage interest deduction.
Good luck with that one
Brosephus™
December 3rd, 2012
3:00 pm
And why do we keep paying people to have more children.
More children equals more future workers. It’s not as much as paying people to have more children as it is giving people a break on their taxes from having to raise more children. The current estimation for raising a child from birth to age 18 is somewhere around $250k.
A middle-income family may spend $226,920 to raise a child born in 2010 to the age of 18, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said today in a report.
The estimate is up 2.1 percent from 2009, according to the study, posted today on the department’s website. Expenses for child care, education, transportation and health services represented the biggest increases in child-rearing costs, the USDA said in a statement accompanying the report.
The typical two-parent family spent from $11,880 to $13,830 on each child, the study found. Households that make less spend less, USDA researchers said. A family earning less than $57,600 a year is likely to spend $163,440 in 2010 dollars to rear a child, while parents earning more than $99,730 may pay $377,040, according to the study.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-09/u-s-child-born-in-2010-may-cost-226-920-to-raise-usda-says.html
When compared to the maximum amount one can get with EITC, the two numbers are nowhere near close to what it costs to raise a child.
A middle-income family may spend $226,920 to raise a child born in 2010 to the age of 18, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said today in a report.
The estimate is up 2.1 percent from 2009, according to the study, posted today on the department’s website. Expenses for child care, education, transportation and health services represented the biggest increases in child-rearing costs, the USDA said in a statement accompanying the report.
The typical two-parent family spent from $11,880 to $13,830 on each child, the study found. Households that make less spend less, USDA researchers said. A family earning less than $57,600 a year is likely to spend $163,440 in 2010 dollars to rear a child, while parents earning more than $99,730 may pay $377,040, according to the study.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/key-elements/family/eitc.cfm
You basically either want poor people to stop reproducing or you want jobs to pay more to help with child raising expenses, which is it? or is there different options that I’m missing?
Brosephus™
December 3rd, 2012
3:02 pm
Oops…
Families with three or more children may receive a credit of up to $5,891 in 2012. The maximum credit is $5,236 for families with two children, $3,169 for families with one child, and just $475 for those without children.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/key-elements/family/eitc.cfm
alex
December 3rd, 2012
3:02 pm
Nunna, great I have been following your “fight”, and when ANYONE references Vanguard, the keeper of my cash–I listen. I suspect you are right you guys have been comparing the proposed Obama increase on ONLY money above 250,oo0 and paul was really correct in that you were assuming an increase, not on the marginal rate but on the entire structure of increases if the BUSH cuts drop out…? Paul is that correct? I believe this is what JHM is saying, but can we please move on.
Dr. freud: Karl and I agree, but we think this all has to do with Nancy Pelosi’s Cali -look, just another freudian slip……Pavlov
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
3:02 pm
Nunna
“Ok, assuming that the information in Paul’s link is correct and will not be revised by congress at the last minute, the “2012 tax” is $75,906 versus $85,068. Increase is “only” $9,162. Still a whole lot more than $2,000.”
Ummm.. no. Let’s walk thru this.
2012 marginal rate for someone with agi $300,000 is
0.33(300000-250000)
Subtract the $250,000 from $300.000 and get $50,000. Multiply that by .33 to get $16,500.
Proposed marginal rate for 2013 is .36(300,000-250,000).
300,000 minus $250,000 is $50,000 times .36 is $18,000.
Proposed 2013 is $18,000 less $16,500 from 2012 rate is difference (increase) of $1,500.
I know, I know, it undercuts the mantra of “but they’re taxed almost all they have and this will take all of it!’ but numbers are numbers.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 3rd, 2012
3:03 pm
Bromance SHEETZ!
Paul
December 3rd, 2012
3:05 pm
alex
Yes.
My underlying reason for engaging on this was because it so clearly illustrates the misinformation that many accept as to how ‘large’ the increase would be on the wealthiest. When actual numbers are presented, many making the case the increases would be exorbitant say “waitadadgumminnit… that can’t be right…”
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
3:06 pm
Without going back to find the exact wording of the post, your argument was essentially “what’s the big deal, their taxes will only go up $2,000. What’s that to someone making $300,000?” The tax will go up substantially more than $2,000. Marginal rates and income brackets BOTH have to be taken into consideration.
St Simons - aboriginal BOOTAKOOK 2014
December 3rd, 2012
3:09 pm
I have often wondered if we eliminated the mort interest deduction,
a) would we discourage people from buying houses?
b) would mortgage providers fill the void with more attractive rates?
c) would NPV of existing housing drop?
chuck
December 3rd, 2012
3:09 pm
How about derriere derby?
As for my comments about cliff jumping, why is President Barack HUSSEIN Obama NOT talking about spending cuts? Because he doesn’t think that he has to. He thinks that number one, he is above the law. He has essentially said that if congress doesn’t do what he wants, then he will bypass them. How many of you would have let that statement go by if W had said it? I thought so. Second, even though there is a SIZABLE Republican majority in HofR, he thinks he has some sort of irresistible mandate from the American people to do whatever he wants to. Third, he’s a democrat, so he thinks he is entitled to having his way regardless how it hurts the American economy.
I hope Obama DOES take us over the cliff, if it means an increase in taxes for ANYONE without HUGE spending cuts…like back to 2008 levels.
Has no one considered the fact that our spending is equal to the 2008 budget PLUS the 2008 stimulus PLUS the 2009 stimulus? How did those 2 stimulus packages become a permanent part of our spending? It is almost criminal that this is occurring under our very noses and nobody is even talking about it. INCLUDING the Republican leadership. What should occur, is that the HofR should DEMAND that President Barack HUSSEIN Obama send them a balanced budget or face a government shut down. If no budget arrives, they should pass a spending bill to cover Social Security, Medicare and the military and DARE the dems to vote it down. Come on guys. Time to grow a pair.
Constructive Feedback
December 3rd, 2012
3:11 pm
Mr Bookman:
Am I allowed to call you a “racist” for omitting a picture of the current President Of The United States but including a picture of a White Republican male who has no elective power to do anything about the Fiscal Cliff?
I thought that “The Nation Magazine” was bad for indicting Romney for his supposed $15 Million profit from the GM bailout – while they were gleeful that Obama spent $49.5 billion in Debt Money in a year with a debt of over $1,000 Billion.
I think that you have “The Nation” topped sir.
By the way – Why don’t you tell your loyal followers that of the $600 billion of “The Cliff” the part that Obama is fighting over – “The Taxes Upon The 1.0%” represents only $40 billion? (Or did you not see the graphic in the USA Today a few weeks ago?)
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 3rd, 2012
3:12 pm
…Barack HUSSEIN Obama…
There’s YOUR sign.
alex
December 3rd, 2012
3:13 pm
Nunna, IF the rates go back to the pre-bush cuts in their entirety (sp), then you are correct and EVERYONE will be PO’d, I’m not taking sides, just want to get accurrate information. I hope I have…
Lovely day….
Nunna Yobinnes
December 3rd, 2012
3:15 pm
Yes, it is a shame that people continue to pass on misinformation to the public who are either unwilling or unable to make the tax calculations for themselves to see that the $2,000 increase is false and misleading.
alex
December 3rd, 2012
3:17 pm
@Youlib: Berkley professor, left wing, separated from Krugman at birth–expected opinion, Ya think he and Krugman ever talk???
@ Constructive: looks like Romney is having FUN, so be it, he tried, he failed let the man laugh and be done with it…
Oscar
December 3rd, 2012
3:17 pm
St Simons – None of the above. Compared to other countries who don’t have the deduction, our home ownership is about the same.
Most people that have a mortgage take the standard deduction and don’t get the benefit of the special deduction.
All the deduction does is maybe subsidize people to build million dollar plus houses. We should not be doing that.
williebkind
December 3rd, 2012
3:23 pm
Since most of the middle class voters are not red states, according to the brilliantly educated liberals, let the morons lead the country off the cliff. I do not want the conservatives giving up any values and call it compromising. I live tight all the time so it will not bother me if those morons on the east & west coast have to eat cup of noodles everyday. Let communist dictator do his thing!