Deal Between Obama & GOP NOT A Compromise, Both Extremes Got What They Wanted
Lets get this straight. Neither side compromised here, this is a straight up horse trade.
The GOP wanted to keep all of the tax cuts without paying for them. They got that for two years. Obama and the democrats wanted the extension of the unemployment benefits, also without paying for it. They got that for 13 months. Just like so many other things, the two parties get what they want, and they pass the bill on down to the future generations.
What might REAL compromise look like?
Some republicans said they’d have approved the unemployment extension had Obama and the democrats found a way to pay for it. They didn’t even try, and ignored this from the get go. But there is still unspent stimulus money that could have been redirected towards this, had they actually been at all interested in compromising, or even paying for some of it.
And some democrats offered the republicans a compromise where they chose a higher income level to not let the Bush tax cuts expire, but of course the GOP wouldn’t budge. Some of the offers would even have let the breaks on some fairly high income levels be made permenant, had the GOP met them half way.
No… neither side compromised. Both dug in their heels, got what they ultimately wanted, and we’re all going to pay for it later.
About Solomon Kleinsmith
I started this site in the summer of 2010, really just as a hobby at first. But I'm pretty ambitious, and between being able to recruit some great bloggers to join the team here, putting a ton of work into the site and attracting a lot of traffic through Twitter, we've grown very fast for a young blog with next to no budget.
- Web |
- More Posts (1401)
The unemployment benefits will be used by the stimulus money.
That doesn't make any sense, haha
What are you trying to say?
I disagree. For the deal to pass, Dems will have to vote for tax cuts for the wealthy, which they disagree with. And I think many Reps will have to hold their nose to vote for the extension of unemployment benefits. Add in the other tax breaks and reinstating the estate tax, I think both sides gave a litte.
Now you're right that this thing ain't paid for, which is particularly troubling given our fiscal situation. But it's the first step towards actual governance I've seen from the Reps in two years, and that's something.
You do realize nothing you just said goes against what I said…
The GOP came to the table with what they wanted… all the Bush tax cuts to remain… they got that.
The dems came to the table with an unemployment extension… they got that.
Neither side budged on those things… there are some other things tacked on that they look to have actually negotieted on, but those core things were not compromises, they were TRADES.
What it amounts to is:
"You give us exactly what you want on this issue, we'll give you exactly what you want on this other issue… and we'll stick the tab to the future generation"
Each side didn't get exactly what they wanted on the issue. Rather each side got something less, which seems to me to be an indicator that they did compromise. Of course, the fact that a comprimise was reached doesn't mean that it was good policy. And certainly no consensus was reached on these important issues. But I think consensus is a very high standard to expect of pollitics.
Yes, but last I checked a compromise is supposed to be 50/50, or at least a 60/40 that everyone can live with.
But 80/80 is not a compromise. I don't know what to call it.
YES!!!! Thank you!!!! Your headline says it all! I was just trying to explain this to someone this morning.
Happy to be of service :)
What are the chances that the lame-stream media will actually present this point as clearly and succinctly as you have? I won't hold my breath waiting or waste my time watching the news hoping to hear it.
Are you going to actually make an argument, or just keep repeating yourself?