Weekdays at 12noon on 770 AM: The Truth
 Michael Medved

Agree on Goals, Guys

December 3, 2012 @ 11:35 am

The biggest obstacle to a bi-partisan deal for avoiding the fiscal cliff involves an inability to agree on specific, common goals. The underlying aim for Democrats is to close gaps between rich and poor by raising taxes on the wealthy; the deepest goal for Republicans is to slow the growth of government by cutting spending.

Both sides, however, already recognize the urgent need to boost revenues while simultaneously reducing expenditures. This year, government spending reached one-quarter of GDP—close to a seventy-year high—while receipts amounted to only 15.8%, close to a postwar low. Over the next decade, spending must decline to its Bush-era average of 20%, while revenue returns to its Clinton-era average, 19%. If the two parties could agree on these or similar numbers, they could begin to work together to fill in the details.

More Michael Medved

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (66)


  • Add A Comment

  • messiah101 wrote...
    "Closing Gaps between rich and poor"?
    December 3, 2012 11:11 am
    Yeah that extra few points we want the Koch Brothers to pay will have them looking over their shoulders and put them in a panic that the poor are gaining on them.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    "The deepest goal for Republicans is to slow the growth of government by cutting spending".
    December 3, 2012 12:15 pm
    That is an outright lie. Since Ike no Republican president has balanced the budget.

    iki.answers.com/Q/Which_republican_president_balanced_a_budget

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • FormerMarineSgt wrote...
    Michael - I can't believe it....
    December 3, 2012 12:59 pm
    I nearly agree with you 100%!!! Who are you and what have you done with the real Medved? This is a very even handed, facts based column and it's quite refreshing! The only part of your comment that I disgree with (and I'll do so quite respectfully because of your even handed writing) is "the deepest goal for Republicans is to slow the growth of government by cutting spending" - while it is true that they say this, reality is that they have been right up there with the biggest spenders more often than not. They spend like drunken sailors just like dems - maybe one different government programs than dems, but they do spend like them. Let's see if they actually carry through with what they say the want - as history clearly shows that we should not blindly believe them on thier own spending habits.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Forbes 08/07/12
    December 3, 2012 1:19 pm
    Shawn Ritenour, "Beware of equating GDP with the economy and increased GDP with prosperity"
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • fartforce1 wrote...
    Mikey, get real dude! The underlying aim is not what you said at all.
    December 3, 2012 5:52 pm
    The underlying aim is to make the rich pay close to the same as they did the moment Clinton left office and W took over, before the tax breaks that drank up the surplus. Democrats are also tired of the dog and pony show.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleD wrote...
    While the Republitards in congress are adamant taxes on millionaires never get raised
    December 3, 2012 5:59 pm
    they are more than happy to jack up the payroll tax on the middle-class.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • roomtemp wrote...
    "Over the next decade, spending must decline to its Bush-era average of 20%"
    December 3, 2012 7:51 pm
    Bwaahahaha! Yeah, that will fix it...

    -Reality check-

    "All I Want For Christmas Is The Truth"

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-03/guest-post-all-i-want-christmas-truth

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    What this all boils down to is,
    December 3, 2012 8:37 pm
    Republicans want to cut Medicare and Social Security so they can maintain a tax cut for billionaires.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Sorry but Obama has ALREADY gutted Medicare $715B for 'affordable' health care.
    December 4, 2012 2:56 am
    And Social Security was SUPPOSED to have been secure before everyone from Bush I used it as a cash cow and for the past 4 years the payroll tax was cut in half.

    Hey, here's an Idea House Democrats once had before Harry Reid shot them down: ... Instead of $250,000, why not start the higher taxes at $1M? ... Compromise. ... But go after some entitlements now as well.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    715 Billion over 10 years hardly gutted Medicare
    December 4, 2012 5:17 am
    From what I can read and comprehend was that no patient benefits were reduced. Money was saved by cutting unwarranted subsidies to providers and insurance companies. Besides the cuts are still use used for healthcare for citizens through Obamacare. The point in my statement is that that the republicans basically want to reduce benefits to seniors to fund lower tax rates for the 1%. That cannot be denied. Look at their proposal.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Forrest - that's MY Medicare money being SHIFTED to other people.
    December 4, 2012 5:33 am
    Sorry you bought into that 'unwarranted subsidies' cover. (And IF the GOP had said that, the left would have called it an attack on the elderly). ... And I hardly think that health benefits for someone on their 20s is the same because THEY are citizens, too. ... And its also very much s bste and switch - but, of course, no one read that health bill ahead of time.

    But MY point is that we CAN compromise on who gets what for tax cuts. Either way - $250,000 or $1M, your not getting THAT MUCH extra revenue. ..... This whole 'tax cuts for the wealthy' thing has devolved into nothing more that political points that ultimately make little difference to the budget.

    I think Boehner COULD probable compromise for $1M IF Obama would do the same. ... And THEN all could wait on entitlements a couple of months. .. But work the tax thing NOW>

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 5:50 am
    So the entire middle class should be held hostage in order to appease those that earn $250 K to $1 Million?Take into account that persons earning that type of (adjusted) income would only be paying the extra points on the total surpassing $250K,so a $300,000 income individual will pay $2000 more in taxes
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    MESSIAH - You are nothing but an ideolog. Compromise is a TWO WAY STREET !!!! ----- BOTH WAYS.
    December 4, 2012 6:09 am
    The $1M was a DEMOCRAT proposed compromise last spring (I think it was then). ... Just what is so sacred about $250,000 that Mr. OBAMA will not move off of it?

    And BOTH sides are attempting to hold the middle class hostage. INCLUDING the President. .... If both sides can get off ideology and talking points for a little while, compromise IS possible.

    But it takes BOTH sides to make a deal.

    If you can actually look past the talking points and the pap fed to the 'base' BY BOTH SIDES, there are solutions.

    That does assume that both sides actually WANT a solution. Obama, it appears, is happy to sacrifice the middle class if that fits his agenda. So long as someone else gets the blame.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 7:00 am
    Have you ever thought that that taxes from the larger $250K-$1 million group is needed to make the plan work?As I pointed out the Dems don't need to compromise on that issue,the voters waned it and polls show most people support it. My advice to the GOP is to pick a fight that you can actually win. Remember the Dems control 2/3 rds of the government so the GOP is not in the position to ask the Dems to compromise a whole lot.I'm still waiting for the GOP to release a list of SPECIFIC loop holes they suggest be closed
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    What plan ??????????????
    December 4, 2012 7:09 am
    Has the president EVER announced a 'plan'???????

    But, just maybe, whatever 'plan' Obama has works so much better is taxes go up on everyone - and he can blame the republicans. ..... So, I guess, why should he compromise? It's only the American people who will suffer for 'the base'.

    Oh, but then, messiah. You are part of that base, aren't you.?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 11:17 am
    As I mentioned earlier we may fall over the cliff come Jan 1 but as I mentioned earlier the Dems will then propose a tax cut for those below $250K a year and the GOP would be forced to accept it or face the wrath of the GOP middle class voter. As I stated the GOP has put itself in a no win situation,they got to make a deal
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    ron p
    December 4, 2012 5:58 am
    So you want the Congress to kick the entitlement can down the road again,your calling for a patch and not for a solution.Remember Obama holds the hammer,if the GOP does not allow for more taxes for the wealthy Obama will say NO and taxes will automatically rise for Everyone and then after the 1st of the year the Dems will introduce a tax deduction for those earning $250 K or less and the GOP will have to go along with it or risk the wrath of all middle class GOP voters.The GOP painted themselves into a corner on this issue and can only blame themselves for the total mess they are in
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    No, messiah, I would rather entitlements be tackled NOW.
    December 4, 2012 6:15 am
    It's YOUR president who wants to put off anything regarding entitlements until next year (if ever?).

    And I thought we simply re-elected a president. Not a tyrant who rules with an iron fist.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 7:01 am
    "Tyrant" ? "Iron Fist"??,actually Obama is attempting to honor the pledges he made to gain re-election.Oh by the way Obama IS YOUR President also.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    I give up.
    December 4, 2012 7:18 am
    Messiah, you truly are a monarchist.

    BTW - screw the rich was only ONE of Oz's campaign pledges. ... Which others can we expect to be similarily shoved down our craw?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 9:16 am
    How is it that asking a person earning $300K in adjusted income to pay an additional $2K in taxes looked upon by you as screwing the rich?You obviously have failed to understand that the wealthy have gained more ground since the 90s and the middle class has LOST ground.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    I gave up already, messiah. Your logic is well beyond me.
    December 4, 2012 9:28 am
    In deference to Danm Yankees, whatever Barack wants, Barack gets. ....... After all, didn't we just elect him King?

    But, actually, the middle class was doing just fine until the credit/financial melt down on 2008. It's only the past 4 years we've been loosing ground. .... And, IF Oz ever had a plan, why didn't we hear about it 4 years ago ?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 11:25 am
    No the middle class was not doing fine prior to 2008,median income dropped after Bush took office (it had climbed every year during Clintons terms).Google is your friend,look it up.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Google is not MY friend.
    December 4, 2012 1:06 pm
    heck, we hardly even speak, except when I do a Google search on my phone. Other than that, Google is a nodding guy at the store, at best.

    Otherwise, I'm no fan of Boy George either, but he didn't create all the evils of the world. (that was Dick Chaney's job).

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 2:00 pm
    Then I suggest you and Google become better friends as it will open your eyes about the error of your ways.A couple of questions for you,Do you believe the BIGGEST compromise should come from the GOP? If not why not? Remember the American voter elected a Dem for President and also gave the Dems a majority in the Senate (thats 2/3rds the government if your doing the math).I understand that Obama certainly has NO MANDATE but what percentage (55,60,65) of what the Dems want should they get?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Good Night, messiah
    December 4, 2012 3:23 pm
    It must be time for your meds by now.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Oh, and we all already established a few months ago that math is not my strong point.
    December 4, 2012 3:26 pm
    But - 55, or 60% of what the Democrats want would be a fair compromise.

    The problem is Oz demands 100%.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 4, 2012 6:12 pm
    Evidently you don't understand negotiations.The first side to make a concession is the weaker side THEN the stronger side responds.If the initial offer is not in the ball park the stronger side responds with their opening offer no concession from the stronger side is made until some concession is made by the weaker.In this budget negotiation the GOP has put itself in such a poor position politically the dems are asking for the moon.Politics is about payback and the Dems feel that because of the GOP actions over the past 4 years political payback is in order. They want the cake and they want to rub the GOP party's nose in the Dew Dew
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 5, 2012 11:50 am
    Your reference to Obama as "KING" shows anyone who watches Righty Wing media (as I do ) that you are a willing soldier and propaganda spreader who follows orders and hold no opinion that hasn't been approved by his masters. King, Monarchy,Supreme Leader,Dictator are commonly used words injected into comments by Far Righty propagandists.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 5, 2012 12:02 pm
    How do you feel about Boehner kicking TWO conservative Tea Party leaning Congressmen from the Budget Committee yesterday? Is that something that a KING would do or a person using common sense in getting rid of TWO obstructionist individuals who will NOT compromise on any tax issue
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    ron prevost wrote... Forrest - that's MY Medicare money being SHIFTED to other people.
    December 4, 2012 7:23 am
    I don't think your medicare was Ron as Plan A Medicare wasn't cut (the medicare with the trust fund).
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    OK, Forrest, enlighten me.
    December 4, 2012 7:35 am
    Was that whole $715,000,000,000 just loose change going to no earthly purpose?

    Unless otherwise, that's $715B taken away from those of us currently covered by Medicare. Regardless of Plan A, or Plan B, or Plan D (which I do not use, but would If I didn't have insurance).

    .

    But this is still getting off the idea that both sides need to compromise. ... That's MY ideology. We really don't need to choose up sides to help people.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    Left wing Parrots, other than what they are told by MSNBC,
    December 4, 2012 5:47 am
    do not ever hear of what it actually happening. Other than their Dear Leader was re immaculated and the rich are EVIL!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    What would my morning be like without the
    December 4, 2012 6:05 am
    "Immaculate Parrot" squawking and crapping on the morning paper.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    HaHa
    December 4, 2012 7:03 am
    In the 4 years that Obama has held power I have never heard Obama or ANY member of his administration refer to the RICH as EVIL. Do you have a link or is this your daily release of far Right B/S?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    Here's the truth about the deficit and Republican offer
    December 4, 2012 7:14 am
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/04/three-card-budget-monte/
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    since when is Krugman truth?
    December 4, 2012 7:19 am
    About as unbiased as Sarah Palin.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    Krugman??? Non partison economist do NOT take Krugman seriously
    December 4, 2012 8:53 am
    Krugman???
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Logical???
    December 4, 2012 9:19 am
    Yeah the Paul Krugman that won the NOBEL prize in economics THAT KRUGMAN
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    And Obama 'won' the Nobel Peace Prize before even taking office.
    December 4, 2012 9:30 am
    ..........
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    yes and then Krugman drank the cool aid and lost his mind.
    December 4, 2012 10:45 am
    Now he is full of double standard beliefs and when he took on an Eastern European country, there president took him to the hoop and shoot his false data full of holes. PS-IT TAKES A BRAVE MIDDLE CLASS TO RAISE TAXES ON THE RICH, SO VERY BRAVE!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • William Lawn wrote...
    Ask AJ
    December 5, 2012 6:49 am
    He thinks his opinions should be respected.

    Too funny

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    Do you realize that if America had universal healthcare...
    December 4, 2012 7:30 am
    like every civilized country in the world except Turkey, we wouldn't be having this discussion about Medicare.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }