Quantcast

President meets with labor leaders as Congress returns today. Will they be able to find a compromise to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff”?

Fox Report with Shepard Smith 2012/11/13 16:53:50
Related Topics: Congress, Labor, President
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Lanikai 2012/11/16 15:40:00
    No
    Lanikai
    +4
    The only way to save the nation, lower the unemployment and have a positive impact is to STOP obamacare, which is crippling business.

    SInce they refuse cause the emporer wants this to break our backs, let us hit the cliff.

    As long as the only plan is to raise taxes, and NOT cut off the deadbeats, hit the cliff, who cares.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Cat 2012/11/22 18:26:11
    No
    Cat
    No solution will come from Trumka.
  • MsDianna 2012/11/20 01:42:25
    No
    MsDianna
    no I don't believe so
  • mothermayhem 2012/11/19 19:00:24
    No
    mothermayhem
    we are already falling head first into the abyss
  • mrdog 2012/11/19 15:13:09
    No
    mrdog
    But who cares...voters didn't care why should I care...bark
  • bluelady 2012/11/19 14:32:02
    No
    bluelady
    +1
    all the Obamination wants to do is tax and spend......he needs to learn how to BUDGET and quit spending our grankids legacy
  • maggied45 2012/11/19 05:15:39
    Yes
    maggied45
    It's convenient to label things with names like the "fiscal cliff" to get us all worked up and then believe they've done some great thing when they just extend some cuts to evade it. Long term, I believe it's going to be like putting a bandaid on a hole in the Hoover Dam.
  • abubincrazy 2012/11/19 04:04:14
    Yes
    abubincrazy
    The so-called fiscal cliff is the scam they will use to rob us blind THIS time.
    Their bribers want pay-back for the bribes, and this is the lie they will use to pick Americans' pockets again.
    Intemperate? Sure. And correct.
  • Steve 2012/11/18 03:12:24
  • ruthannhausman 2012/11/17 22:23:54
    No
    ruthannhausman
    +1
    Obama is not interested in compromise, only in the appearances of compromise. But I don't get what his problem is because he can sign off on just about anything under the guise of compromise knowing full well that 2013 begins horrendous tax and regulation increases via his treacherous Obamacare bill. Has anybody bothered to listen to or read for themselves some of the provisions in that POS that will insure our medical care and taxation policies will be the most progressive, damaging and freedom-killing in the entire world?

    I am thoroughly disgusted with the people in this country. Bunch of whiny babies, thin-skinned dorks who don't bother to study or understand free enterprise, enjoy their little handouts, love the idea of not having any responsibilities for their families or major personal health decisions anymore because Big Daddy is gonna take care of them cradle to grave. Stupid jackasses.

    I move we take one big, huge bucket of gasoline and go out to Arlington Cemetery and all the other veteran cemeteries and just burn down all the memorials and grave markers for those brave individuals who died trying to secure freedom for Americans because I'm sure they're just as ashamed as I am.
  • Murph 65 ruthann... 2012/11/17 22:47:42
    Murph 65
    Tell me how you really feel! :)
  • mike j 2012/11/17 22:10:28
    No
    mike j
    +1
    NO and for all of you Republicans , Independants and conservative Democrats in Congress, take it from an old saying , that came out of WDC years ago , Just Say NO. say NO to compromise with Progressives and Liberals. If it means grinding WDC to a stop . Just hold the line , let the Progressives and Liberals know that the Parents are in the House and the foot is down. Bring WDC to a halt if you have to do it and get a grip on Government , on our tax money. If a bill is full of measures that are not good for America dont compromise , kill it , and tell the makers of the bill go back and take out all the measures that are bad for America and come back another day. The American taxpayer needs you to be the Parent in the Room and restore order.
  • tornado 2012/11/17 13:03:34 (edited)
    Yes
    tornado
    I think we have a better shot at reaching a compromise with Obama than we would have with Romney. He likes to fire good workers who disagree with him politically and he kept changing his mind on what he wanted to accomplish as President. He's very out of touch with 99% of us.That's not going to help the economy. A greedy corporate far right president is a scary thought to me. He'd suck the middle class dry and send us all to hell.

    Robot Romney
  • uui tornado 2012/11/17 18:19:59
  • ruthann... tornado 2012/11/17 22:49:08
    ruthannhausman
    +2
    You read an honorable man wrong, as did a lot of other people, and now this country is doomed with Obama and his progressive agenda. I am not going to argue with you about Romney's qualifications and what he could, would or should have done because it is now moot. The "people" bought the soft-peddled Obama. It is funny that you portray Romney as Dracula; how very ironic.

    Mitt Romney, a highly successful businessman -- as well as a generous, devoted family man I might add -- would have made some of the hard decisions which would have been necessary to pull this country back up on its feet. We are involved in so many different things now that it's not easy to keep track of everything. But you all have bought the notion that because Romney is so successful that he must have killed off a heck of a lot of people. Not so. The man went into failing businesses, mismanaged businesses, places that were teetering on the brink of bankruptcy or worse. Yes, a lot of people lost their jobs in the reorganizations; however, in the long run, most of those businesses not only regained their strength and success but they actually expanded and, in the meantime, were able to hire back most if not all of their previous employees, as well as adding additional job openings in the marketplaces.

    ...

    You read an honorable man wrong, as did a lot of other people, and now this country is doomed with Obama and his progressive agenda. I am not going to argue with you about Romney's qualifications and what he could, would or should have done because it is now moot. The "people" bought the soft-peddled Obama. It is funny that you portray Romney as Dracula; how very ironic.

    Mitt Romney, a highly successful businessman -- as well as a generous, devoted family man I might add -- would have made some of the hard decisions which would have been necessary to pull this country back up on its feet. We are involved in so many different things now that it's not easy to keep track of everything. But you all have bought the notion that because Romney is so successful that he must have killed off a heck of a lot of people. Not so. The man went into failing businesses, mismanaged businesses, places that were teetering on the brink of bankruptcy or worse. Yes, a lot of people lost their jobs in the reorganizations; however, in the long run, most of those businesses not only regained their strength and success but they actually expanded and, in the meantime, were able to hire back most if not all of their previous employees, as well as adding additional job openings in the marketplaces.

    People fear conservatives. Why? Because they're so sure that conservatives are going to take away all their toys and dip into people's bank accounts and strip them down or whatever. You don't realize that Obama and his socialist cronies is doing just the same, only he doesn't give you lectures about personal responsibility, taking care of your own and making the hard choices in life. He puts money and favors into your outstretched hands with a huge smile, demonizes rich folks and promises to shave them down a few pegs, and while you're standing there like a dutiful child, he's embedded hidden taxes into your medical care, passes regulations to the tune of 65 new regs per day guaranteed to confuse and then strangle small businesses and big businesses alike. You see these things happening -- Hostess coming to mind right now? -- but you don't "see" them happening. You only see greedy capitalists out for the bottom line profits and down with labor.

    Ah, yes, and then there are the labor unions. I imagine the unions involved with the Hostess bust, their representatives are still drawing big paychecks and maintaining their retirement funds intact. Obama loves unions. They got him reelected, you know, along with our minorities, both living and dead, legal and illegal. The Obama team talked a smooth, delectable line that was easily swallowed by a lot of people. Conservative lingo is a little off-putting to a lot of people, I totally understand that. But life is hard and full of hard choices. Mitt Romney would have guided America through those choices and, I assure you, would not have run over the "little guys" while doing so. Too bad the voters didn't give him the chance to prove his worth. I assure you, you aren't going to be happy with what is coming down the pike.
    (more)
  • Murph 65 ruthann... 2012/11/17 23:16:37
    Murph 65
    Good answer. Very good answer. Great answer. Way to go, Ruth.
  • sglmom 2012/11/16 17:31:49
    No
    sglmom
    +1
    That meeting is just the final shove off the cliff ..
    (Hostess ring a bell right now?)

    This is the time for objections to happen ..
    and stand firm AGAINST any thing this proposes ..
    our nation is in an economic depression ..
    TIME To start REPEALING The messes already shoved through ...
    (starting with obiecare .. which is CRIPPLING NEW TAXES levied on us .. all withOUT representation)
  • joe keeney 2012/11/16 17:28:07
    No
    joe keeney
    +2
    Republican stand your ground this is your last chance. You fold your done.
  • Lanikai 2012/11/16 15:40:00
    No
    Lanikai
    +4
    The only way to save the nation, lower the unemployment and have a positive impact is to STOP obamacare, which is crippling business.

    SInce they refuse cause the emporer wants this to break our backs, let us hit the cliff.

    As long as the only plan is to raise taxes, and NOT cut off the deadbeats, hit the cliff, who cares.
  • Michael S. 2012/11/16 00:36:15 (edited)
    No
    Michael S.
    +3
    It depends on what you mean by the "fiscal cliff." It seems that common usage refers to a situation where the yearly deficit would have to drop..."Oh, the horror! Anything but that! We have to avoid it!" That's not the real cliff though: The real cliff will occur when the government can't fund itself with printed money anymore and the "road runs out."

    Unless they're prepared to cut a trillion in spending, we will continue driving toward the cliff. They're not prepared to cut a trillion in spending, so we will continue driving toward the cliff...and eventually fly right off it. Once the world loses enough confidence in the dollar for OPEC to start taking other currencies for oil, international demand for the dollar will plummet.

    Without exports to maintain demand, we will either see very high gradual inflation or sudden hyperinflation, keeping us from buying the oil we need to grow and transport food...and it will get quite ugly, possibly very quickly. At that point, we'll be faced with three options:

    a.) Painfully adapt to our new role as a third world country, cut government spending by 90 %, and rebuild a production-focused economy from the ground up.
    b.) Do something extraordinarily stupid like triple the size of the military and try to control the world's oil by force.
    c.)...





    It depends on what you mean by the "fiscal cliff." It seems that common usage refers to a situation where the yearly deficit would have to drop..."Oh, the horror! Anything but that! We have to avoid it!" That's not the real cliff though: The real cliff will occur when the government can't fund itself with printed money anymore and the "road runs out."

    Unless they're prepared to cut a trillion in spending, we will continue driving toward the cliff. They're not prepared to cut a trillion in spending, so we will continue driving toward the cliff...and eventually fly right off it. Once the world loses enough confidence in the dollar for OPEC to start taking other currencies for oil, international demand for the dollar will plummet.

    Without exports to maintain demand, we will either see very high gradual inflation or sudden hyperinflation, keeping us from buying the oil we need to grow and transport food...and it will get quite ugly, possibly very quickly. At that point, we'll be faced with three options:

    a.) Painfully adapt to our new role as a third world country, cut government spending by 90 %, and rebuild a production-focused economy from the ground up.
    b.) Do something extraordinarily stupid like triple the size of the military and try to control the world's oil by force.
    c.) Do something extraordinarily stupid like cave to global governance.

    The second option isn't exactly sustainable, but it seemed to be Romney's preferred way of dealing with the situation (even though it would eventually cause World War III as the US, Israel, and a few allies fought against China, Russia, Iran, the entire Middle East except Israel, and their allies). I imagine Obama's preferred way of dealing with the situation may be the third option: I think he'd prefer to trade in dollars for a new IMF-created world fiat currency before the dollar implodes (kicking the can down the road until the world fiat currency imploded for the same reason). We could no longer print money beyond that point, so he'd either tax the crap out of everyone and bring the economy to a screeching halt in a vain attempt to balance the budget...or he could just let the government go bankrupt and demand regional or global government to "save us." Neither would be good news, but I think something like that is on the horizon if the dollar fails under Obama.

    Spending cuts are necessary not only for fiscal sanity and the survival of the dollar but for the broader economy even discounting dollar issues: Most mainstream economists fail to understand that aggregate demand is not the be-all, end-all. There are several reasons for this, but here's one: Whenever the government spends money in a particular sector, it makes that sector more lucrative and diverts investment capital AWAY from all the sectors fueled by actual consumer demand. By spending money, government creates jobs in the short term, but these jobs carry an opportunity cost, and they produce less wealth that consumers demand than market-driven jobs...on a spectrum from being "slightly less efficient" to "as good as paying people to dig ditches and fill them back up," with an emphasis toward the latter. In short, government spending causes a mismatch between what the demand side wants and what the supply side is producing. Until this stops, along with other short-sighted policies, we will all continue getting poorer in the long term (except for government contractors and bankers).

    In other words, we unfortunately NEED a recession - one that is not papered over while the underlying problems fester - in order for the economy to restructure itself around industries that consumers actually demand, in direct proportion to that demand...and using investment capital built on savings rather than the infinite money machine, so interest rates and lending more accurately reflect the underlying economy's capacity for sustainable spending instead of being set too low and contributing to the boom/bust cycle.
    (more)
  • codenamev Michael S. 2012/11/17 01:09:36
    codenamev
    +1
    I may not totally agree with your sentiments, but I'm very pleased that you expressed them in a thoughtful, non-rhetoric, non-partisan way. Thank you for presenting an island of sanity in an ocean of partisan whining. Well done.
  • Michael S. codenamev 2012/11/17 01:38:41
    Michael S.
    +2
    Thanks. :) I suppose the format of this site is a little too conducive to shallow partisan flame wars, since it's set up as more of a procrastination outlet than anything else. It's still always nice to have that rare noncombative discussion though, or just to let out a rant and get a respectful reply, even from someone who disagrees. Well done yourself, making this place that much friendlier.
  • codenamev Michael S. 2012/11/17 01:53:27
    codenamev
    +1
    Okay, I'm officially getting a man-crush on you because you used the word "conducive" and used it correctly. I think that's a first for Sodahead, unless someone copies and pastes someone else's statements. Good on you again, sir.
  • Michael S. codenamev 2012/11/17 02:42:16 (edited)
    Michael S.
    +2
    I've suddenly become self-conscious and borderline nervous about disappointing you with an English mistake somewhere else, but I guess that just means the man-crush is mutual.
  • codenamev Michael S. 2012/11/17 03:19:46
    codenamev
    +1
    HA! Right on.
  • ruthann... codenamev 2012/11/17 22:57:53
    ruthannhausman
    +3
    You and Michael are a couple of nuts! Keep it up. I enjoyed it immensely.

    And you are so very correct about the importance of civility when discussing things so important in our lives. How else am I to be able to attempt to understand my "opponents" or "enemies" if either I don't allow them to express themselves properly (because I cut them off with profanity or whatever) or they insist on pummeling me with F-bombs and whatnot.

    Regardless of your affiliations, though, you guys, it was nice "hearing from" you both.
  • codenamev ruthann... 2012/11/19 02:13:59
    codenamev
    +1
    Personally, I think that it's the responsibility of every intelligent individual who chooses to come here to give some respect to people who actually think before they write something. I try to do that, but it's a very rare animal here.

    But it's also hard to just ignore the ignorant rants that pop up here. I don't suffer fools gladly, and I, perhaps childishly, feel the need to hold some of these people accountable for what they've stated.
  • Murph 65 Michael S. 2012/11/17 22:53:29
    Murph 65
    +2
    Okay, you two, you are giving me a man crush, which happens to be all right since I'm a woman, but there may be others here who will be put in the position of blushing out right, Have to agree, though, that your first answer to this post was level-headed and well written. :)
  • codenamev Murph 65 2012/11/19 02:15:41
    codenamev
    +1
    Ooh, this has all the makings of a JULES AND JIM type of relationship.

    Could be interesting...
  • Murph 65 codenamev 2012/11/19 22:57:23
    Murph 65
    I hope I'm able to find you two again here on SH. Number one, you both can actually write out a complete thought and punctuate that thought so that it can be understood. Number two, you're both very entertaining. Number three, you'll keep me on my toes - won't be able to post and quick hits when dealing with you.
  • THE BEACH 2012/11/14 23:28:00 (edited)
    Yes
    THE BEACH
    Middle class will be happy,i'm sure!
  • Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... 2012/11/14 22:39:41
    No
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +1
    Labor and the far left loons he met with do not give a happy damn
  • santa6642 2012/11/14 21:49:11
    No
    santa6642
    +1
    And I hope they don;t.
  • burningsnowman 2012/11/14 21:01:24
    Yes
    burningsnowman
    Remember the budget deal? The debt ceiling? etc. etc... Not that the "fiscal cliff' is actually worse than the likely alternatives.
  • BigEyedFish 2012/11/14 16:02:04
    No
    BigEyedFish
    +1
    Obama has no intention of compromising.
  • Todd Parsons 2012/11/14 15:45:18
    No
    Todd Parsons
    +1
    I think this will be more of the same
  • davidgoessplat 2012/11/14 05:15:02
    Yes
    davidgoessplat
    There is no way either party will let it happen. Someone will cave.
  • Old Salt 2012/11/14 02:55:04
  • realist 2012/11/13 23:42:37
    No
    realist
    +1
    Obama wants to gap seal over the problem using corporate money, Romney wants to leave things as they are and take baby steps towards a solution.

    Until someone comes along with enough sense to drive a much more aggressive solution which doesn't involve shifting money from one demographic to another, America is still fked in the long run.

    Obama was still the worse pick of the two...so you are doing great guys! lol

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/30 13:42:34

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals