Quote:
Originally Posted by dynalow
Define good. 
Does it mean reducing the projected 2013 deficit by 100 billion? By 50 billion? By 5 million? By 5 cents?
|
In this case I think you could define good as "no negative consequences" so that the deficit doesn't increase and the debt ceiling stays where it is. That would still support the dems' position that the top two can afford to pay a little more without negative consequences. (In any event, you could define "good" later next year if you wanted to debate it, though again, I think if the sky didn't fall, that would be a plus for the dems.)
As far as it taking until 2014 or beyond, I don't really think so. After all, the GOP has been telling us that if the tax cuts for the top two expire, the sky will fall, unemployment will increase drastically, more jobs will leave the US, etc. Assuming their predictions are correct, at least *some* of that would start pretty quickly, because that tax bite would start 1/1/13.
OTOH, dems like to say that their taxes aren't job killers. But lookie what we have here:
Democrats seek delay in one Obamacare tax increase - NBC Politics