MOTR wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2013 at 9:01am:


I am in the band below the Republican level of tax increases and higher than the Democrats desired tax increase populace.

Hence the GOP bailed me out from that lunatic in the White House slugging my family.

It's subjective. There is no definitive answer to that.

No no no man. The $65k comment was related to the equivalent Aussie person in the job I left there.

I don't pay any tax in Australia, I haven't lived there for 4 years now.

Analysis: Cliff deal is another pain-free punt

Congress' hectic resolution of the "fiscal cliff" crisis is the latest in a long series of decisions by lawmakers and the White House to do less than promised — and to ask Americans for little sacrifice — in confronting the nation's burgeoning debt.

The deal will generate $600 billion in new revenue over 10 years, less than half the amount President Barack Obama first called for. It will raise income tax rates only on the very rich, despite Obama's campaign for broader increases.

It puts off the toughest decisions about spending cuts for military and domestic programs, including Medicare and Social Security. And it does nothing to mitigate the looming partisan showdown on the debt ceiling, which must rise soon to avoid default on U.S. loans.

In short, the deal reached between Obama and congressional Republicans continues to let Americans enjoy relatively high levels of government service at low levels of taxation. The only way that's possible, of course, is through heavy borrowing, which future generations will inherit.

While Americans widely denounce the mounting debt, not so many embrace cuts to costly programs like Social Security. And most want tax increases to hit someone other than themselves.

The accord leaves most government programs operating as usual, postponing yet again the threat of serious reductions.

Aside from the payroll tax increase, which drew little debate even though it affects almost all working Americans, the compromise will raise tax rates only on incomes above $450,000 for couples and $400,000 for individuals. That's less than 1 percent of U.S. taxpayers.

Obama had campaigned for thresholds of $200,000 and $250,000.

That might have produced an ugly scene, rattled the financial markets and sparked even more partisan bitterness. But any step toward major deficit-reduction will trigger anger, threats and genuine discomfort for people who receive government services or pay taxes. In other words, everyone.

And such steps can ignite opposition from powerful interest groups, which always stand ready to give money to the campaign opponents of lawmakers who displease them.

Activists on the left and right said the new law doesn't do nearly enough to tame the federal government's borrowing habits.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka praised elements of the deal. But he said that in postponing $1.2 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years, and leaving the debt ceiling unresolved, it is "setting the stage for more fiscal blackmail."

And high-profile groups such as the Simpson-Bowles commission also recommended tough combinations of tax hikes and spending cuts, calling them necessary even if politically unpopular.

These ideas went nowhere.

Every federal dollar, and every federal program, has avid supporters who can defend their functions. And every sector can explain why higher taxes would burden struggling people at the lower end, and "job creators" at the higher end.

High levels of government service. Low levels of taxation. Big deficits to make up the difference. That's what Americans have demanded and gotten from their federal government for years.

The agreement by Obama and Congress to spare Americans the pain of a fiscal cliff is right in line with that tradition.

Link -
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hHT_qKa03r7hQtGFAPS8DZ6gpnmQ?d...
==============================
Nuff said!