Listen to Ross and Burbank weekdays on KIRO Radio 97.3 FM
 Ross+Burbank


socks_ap640.jpg
I did notice I seemed to be opening a lot of socks on Christmas. (AP Photo/File)

Still not buying enough

BY Dave Ross  on December 26, 2012 @ 8:04 am (Updated: 8:37 am - 12/26/12 )

As far as I could tell, the malls were packed over the holidays.

But the latest numbers are described as "weak", and part of the blame goes to all the fiscal cliff talk, which apparently spooked enough shoppers to hold back.

It's the big "U" - uncertainty. Nobody knows how much money they'll get to keep in the coming year.

I did notice I seemed to be opening a lot of socks on Christmas. Although, have you noticed? Socks aren't a cheap gift anymore. They all have some sort of high-tech wicking system, special shock absorbing impact zones, patented open mesh ventilation technology, anti-bacterial odor suppression. I believe some of them update themselves online overnight.

But apparently even $30 socks aren't enough to juice the economy.

So the President will be back in town tomorrow to see if he can get a deal done in the five days that remain.

I'm beginning to think it's going to have to take another shock - like the stock market dropping 2,000 points - to get them off the dime. Did you hear what pollster Frank Luntz said on CBS this morning?

"I'm not sure if either side is watching very carefully or listening to what the American people think," said Luntz.

Still not listening. If they were listening they'd hear that people want a deal.

Seventy percent want rich people to pay higher taxes.

"But an even higher percent support significant spending cuts."

So the polls say Americans want a compromise, and congress doesn't get it, which is why Congress's approval rating has now dropped to 11 percent. How bad is that?

"Gaddafi had a 15 percent job approval rating and that was among the people who killed him.

Well, if we do find ourselves lining up for soup at least we'll have warm socks.

Dave Ross, KIRO Radio Talk Show Host
Dave Ross is co-host of The Ross & Burbank Show on KIRO Radio (weekdays 9-Noon) and never too far from the spotlight.
More Ross and Burbank

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 (35)


  • Add A Comment

  • mnpat wrote...
    Wrap it any way you want
    December 26, 2012 8:23 am
    The middle class is going to get hit hard because there is not enough wealthy to even put a fake dent in the budget shortfall. The country cannot even afford the current costs of social security, medicare, medicaid, health care, and the debt interest let alone anything else. Our esteemded politicians will attempt the band aid approach as the country is on cardiac arrest.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    Dave R- take an honest look at Obama and his attitude torwards success and business.
    December 26, 2012 9:01 am
    Take a look at what the unintendended consequenses of Obamacare likely will be, and in fact in terms of hiring already has effected. I make a pretty good living but i spend my time and effort these days of looking for tax havens and tax protection rather than expansion. Hire somebody- r U kidding? This administration WANTS FOR GOC DEPENDENT POOR, THEY WILL GET THEIR VOTE. I Wil not be a player in this new paradym for much longer. Costa Rica is a very nice place to retire. PS-I GIVE QUITE A LOT TO CHARITY SO IT ISN'T THAT I WOULDN'T MIND GIVING MORE TO THE FEDS BUT I DONT LIKE THE WAY THE COUNTRY IS MOVING. WHY WORK A LOW PAYING JOB WHEN U CAN RIDE THE HANDOUT TRAIN!!!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    logical
    December 26, 2012 10:44 am
    What tax rate did you pay last year?I paid 14% I used NO tax heavens,I filed as a single person.Only major deduction was mortgage.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    messed-I paid a lot more than 14%, paid high property taxes and the other hidden taxes however,
    December 26, 2012 11:24 am
    it is not paying more that I object to, it is paying more to the new America, the America that would have never been able to win WW11, and going forward simply will screw future generations and demonized the rich rather than GROW UP!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • awbitf wrote...
    Love the "logic" Here
    December 26, 2012 12:05 pm
    It's the "new America" that will simply screw future generations, when future generations have been screwed since the 80's and the massive debt accumulation. The same current American's that would never be able to win "WW11" have been fighting two wars over a decade.

    You ask me, it's the "greatest generation" and their kids, the boomers, that have set this country on the road to ruin, and only like to remember their happy memories of their childhood in place of the reality of what they have done to a once prosperous nation.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    Awbitf-what the greatest generation IS NOT GUILTY. They left a manageable debt AFTER winning ww11 on two fronts, Europe and Japan!!!
    December 26, 2012 1:34 pm
    blame the baby boomers, the people who vote for the same person no matter what he or she does, the entitlement mentality and certainly DO NOT EQUATE THE IRAQ AND AFGAN WARS TO WW2. SERIOUSLY, OTHER THAN THE MILITARY MEN AND WOMEN, WHAT SHARED SACRIFICE HAS THE GENERAL POPULATION MADE???
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    logical
    December 27, 2012 4:17 pm
    Property tax has nothing to do with the Feds that your local tax authority.What HIDDEN taxes do you pay that the rest of us do not?I'll ask you again what was your Federal Tax Rate? Thats the question thats on the table. And what do you believe is a FAIR amount of taxes to pay to live in your City,County,State, Country?Are you doing without because of excess taxation? I'm not ,I'm certainly not a wealthy person or even near the upper wage earners of out middle class but I could easily afford to pay more if it means getting this country on better financial footing. But you chose to "CUT AND RUN" to Costa Rica.WHY?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    messiah-I have told u before, I dont want to be a part of watching the decline of America
    December 29, 2012 11:23 am
    #2 i will have dual citizenship. #3 I would have to look up the % and I dont see why that is relevant. I know I work too many hours and have too much stress to throw away the amount I give to the feds. My business does not have many tax deductions available. People like u are part of the decline. U want to punish the sucessfull and have more and more people on the handout train. For me-no thanks.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • deltta wrote...
    messiah
    December 26, 2012 1:09 pm
    You should be able to claim additional tax breaks if you over 65.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    deltta
    December 27, 2012 4:29 pm
    Actually the BIGGEST break is the 401K that can greatly lower your current tax rate but allows you to put that tax off until your retired and probably making less taxable income.I'm currently living well on about $39K take home while sticking about $17-$20 K into the 401.My Real estate tax will drop about $2500 a year when full retirement takes place
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    mnpat
    December 26, 2012 10:40 am
    So the solution is to give EVERYONE a tax break?Oh by the way you left out the ENORMOUS military budget off your list of can't affords.We on the LEFT understand cuts MUST (will) be made but have a difficult time listening to the Right continuing to ask for huge social cuts but not including cuts on military spending
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    The Military
    December 26, 2012 11:55 am
    The Military is one of the things that our government has(is required)to do. And the liberal "dream" is to hobble and defund it.Another requirement is guard the borders , another is actually to have a budget.The Democrat's have not had a budget in over 1000 days.The Democrat's want to collapse the economy so they can modify the Constitution.Dave Ross has us in a soup line.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    messiah, that apparently HAS BEEN the solution for the past 50+ years.
    December 26, 2012 4:25 pm
    Everyone does get a tax break. It's just that some tax breaks are more equal than others, to paraphrase George Orwell. But as far as the military is concerned, we WERE supposed to get a huge 'peace dividend' after the Soviets went out of business. Apparently, though, neither the Bush family, not Clinton nor your hero Obama know how to save money on military spending, not to avoid and/or get out of wars.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Ron P
    December 27, 2012 4:28 pm
    Yes I too was naive in believing that we would be getting a "peace dividend" when we didn't it really made me look at the USA alot differently. I believe because of our HUGE military budget we are the worlds number one war monger and are always looking for conflict in order to justify that Bloated military budget which BOTH the Dems and GOP are in love with
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    Ah, mnpat, but when you adjust the tax rate on just the top one percent of taxpayers
    December 26, 2012 9:12 am
    you adjust the tax rate on 24% of the total income earned in the United States.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/10/26/nyregion/the-new-gilded-age.html

    I agree, there aren't an enormous amount of people represented by the top 1% or even 2% of taxpayers, (somewhere between 3 and 6 million people), but if we're going to tax income, that's where you find it. Many of those 3-6 million taxpayers who log a full one fourth of all income received in the United states construct their affairs so that they are primarily compensated with corporate dividends and capital gains, both taxed at 15%. Romney's a good example. He had to forgo taking some of his deductions last year in order to get his effective tax rate anywhere close to the 13% that he claimed to pay on the hundreds and hundreds of millions he earns each year.

    I also agree that spending cuts are going to be more important than revenue increases. Unless spending is cut, the government will simply include the revenue increases in a broad plan of continued, runaway spending (promoted by both parties, both presently and historically).

    So over the cliff we go. Taxes and spending will both be cut. If people are spending less because they think their budget is going to shrink a little next year, maybe that's realistic. Perhaps the government will follow that example.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    edit, taxes will go up and spending will be cut...
    December 26, 2012 9:34 am
    not taxes and spending will both be cut..

    Need more coffee.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    chuck-tax revenue is looked at as static and in reality it always is dynamic
    December 26, 2012 10:02 am
    One should not assume that say $1 billion in extra tax increase projections will get $ 1 billion as we know the rich have good accountant and there are tax havens. This static vs dynamic tax revenue is easily proven.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cw1997 wrote...
    Real Spending Cuts
    December 26, 2012 9:55 am
    See the Amateur Pres. cannot talk about real spending cuts because that would hurt the pigs at the trough - no Bama phones, no free gas, no free nothing. Those who take and contribute little have no motivation to take a cut. Remember dear Libs and Dave, we are borrowing 4 MILLION DOLLARS an HOUR...think about that~~~~ If you took all the money from the one percent you could run this scheme about six days.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    cw1997.......not so! Cut out every dime of "welfare" and we're still in deep doo...
    December 26, 2012 10:15 am
    Check out www.usdebtclock.org

    Total tax receipts for the FEDGOV, year to date: $2.4 trillion

    Less the following contracted, essential or fixed expenses:

    Medicare: $721 billion.

    Social Security: $761 billion.

    Not looking so good so far, out of the $2.4 trillion collected we have handed roughly $1.5 trillion back to Granny and Gramps for old age health care and retirement entitlements.

    Continuing on:

    Defense: $651 billion, (putting us up to about $2.1 trillion of the $2.4 trillion collected, without a single dime spent, so far, for welfare).

    Interest on the existing debt: $258 billion, (at this point, we have roughly used up every dime collected by the FEDGOV, with no welfare, so far, included).

    Federal pensions: $212 billion (break out the red ink!)

    And finally, "income security", or expenses that would traditionally fall under the welfare category. Far too high at $357 billion. (more red ink)

    And, to this point, we haven't accounted for any of the normal functions of the federal government...even more red ink!

    To say that our fiscal problems are primarily the result of nutrition programs, temporary assistance to needy families, unemployment benefits, and other "welfare" expenditures simply betrays a lack of access to the facts. No, "Obama phones" didn't push us up to the edge of the fiscal cliff.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • mnpat wrote...
    Merry Christmas to all, now Chuck
    December 26, 2012 10:57 am
    When it comes to this mess, it would appear we pretty much agree.........but it appears to me this mess is going to hurt for a very long time. Catching up with the very wealthy is like try to catch a squirrel with your bare hands, getting congress to stop spending money is even harder. There is (in my humble opinion) no way out of the "Big Hurt" unless we take a real hard look at/and fix the entitlement issues because until we do we will never pay down the debt....ever. So in saying.....Social Security has to change, Medicare has to change, medicaid has to change and we need to reduce the debt....if we are going to have a health care system, that has to change as well into a one payer system.............this all is going to hurt everyone and the middle class will [ay for most of it until more Americans pay into the systems generated by political maneuvering.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    chuck, you know I hope that many of us grown ups want to means test and extend the age of medicaid, SSI and other programs.
    December 26, 2012 11:31 am
    you miss a point in welfare spending, there are many, many programs that go to the poor including states Heatth and Human Services and others. Then add the criminal justice system which poor welfare people have a much high rate, add drug/alchol dependency, add prisons which single poor welfare women boys and girls end up at a way higher rate, factor in all sorts of money spend that has zero positive return and even factor the ton of charity and the whole picture is a MASSIVE NET DRAIN without any positive results. Dont bother telling me about exceptions, there are exceptions to............
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Chuck Gould wrote...
    LOM: State spending for health and human services
    December 26, 2012 11:47 am
    is not part of the discussion in the(federal) fiscal cliff negotiations, nor can such spending be specifically blamed on Obama or "Obama phones".

    We agree that it would be reasonable to raise the age of eligibility for Social Security. 65 for full benefits made sense back when the program was introduced and life expectancy was 69 or 70 years. People who retire at 65 and now often live until 85 or more spend almost half as long on Social Security as they ever did working. Does not compute.

    Raise the age of eligibility by 1/4 year each year until the current 65 YO standard gets to 69 or 70.

    The downside is that this will decrease corporate profits as well as increase unemployment. There's some economic benefit to moving the tired, old, senior employee with a ton of seniority and a higher paycheck out of the way to create more opportunity for the young, energetic guy who is still willing to work for less. Retiring people does create jobs, but when they have to be supported in that retirement it is not economically efficient.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • logical open mind wrote...
    chuck-many,many SSI eligible are working today due to the ssi payment being to small and they DID NOT save like they should have.
    December 26, 2012 1:45 pm
    So many will stay in the work force. 2nd my point is not limited to Obama on HHS but not this world that has been created. In the old days, it was the family or the poorhouse if we were destitute. I have distant family members, white who are on the state nipple and they always have money for beer, cigs, pot, cell phone and cable. It will be dealt with in the future even if we today lack the courage.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cdbtx wrote...
    55% spending increase in Obama's
    December 26, 2012 10:34 am
    Plan... and that's after the tax increases.. Only a moron is focused on the rhetoric of tax the rich... it's a chant for fools and idiots...

    I say let the cards fall where they may... those with virtue I'll do what I can to help.. those without... good luck.. hopefully it's an educational ride..

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    Can President Obama golf through this?
    December 26, 2012 10:42 am
    Let's look at the past President Obama cannot lead period.The American people were duped by the media in the election to get the narcissist "non leader" Wanna be dictator/King re-elected even though a majority of the American People thought Mitt would do a better job handling the economy.Shut the government down..or Mr.President...LEAD!!!!!my money is on more of the same.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • calapete wrote...
    you do know that Obama cut his vacation short
    December 26, 2012 12:20 pm
    but not the HOUSE. they failed to show up. Of course, they couldn't even get a deal amongst themselves.

    Replace Boehner for starters. Next session has a better chance for a deal.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    Obama's
    December 26, 2012 12:59 pm
    Been on vacation for the last 4 years....Obama can't even gt his own Democrats to vote for his pathetic budget proposal. It's not the Republicans. It's the wanna be, celebrity, lying, narcissist, boy king who will not deal....
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    Obamas $3,271,622.00 dollar vacation cut short to what would have been easy for anyone other than a hardhead.
    December 26, 2012 3:22 pm
    Christmas shopping SUCKED because HARD HEAD Marxist President Obama has refused to make a deal on the fiscal cliff.!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Hey, it really does help a vacation when you can get those early tee times.
    December 27, 2012 5:31 am
    Of course, He's still not back and Boehner has been working with his caucus since Boxing Day AM.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cdbtx wrote...
    BTW Dave - Maybe you have a page
    December 26, 2012 10:43 am
    for posting sock photos... I probably have one of the larger collections in Seattle... maybe see if I can get them displayed at SAM sometime...
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HLC wrote...
    Social Security would be in great shape if the democrats would have kept their hands off.
    December 26, 2012 12:18 pm
    As long as it has been around the taxacrats have moved the fund so it could be spent on their social engineering. The taxacrats are also the ones who decided to tax it. Then they decided to give it ti immigrants who didn't pay into it.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • CH wrote...
    Social Security would be in great shape if the democrats would have kept their hands off . . . .
    December 26, 2012 4:21 pm
    now that there is funny. But then again We Americans call them Republican munchkins.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Be nice if Social Security were limited to Americans BUT...........
    December 27, 2012 5:39 am
    Every recruited Somali and Ukraine immigrant (as opposed to Mexicans who actually WANT to come here) is allowed to sing up for SSI immediately after getting here.

    BTW, CH. You DO know that the 'payroll tax cut' of the last few years had been workers paying only half the social security taxes needed for solvency? .. That, and 'borrowing' from the Social Security fund.....................

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Forrest wrote...
    Now this is funny, Grover Norquist is upset that the president in not negotiating.
    December 26, 2012 4:39 pm
    Oh the irony.

    http://www.nationalmemo.com/watch-norquist-upset-that-obama-has-not-been-negotiating/#.UNmpRhpCDjA.reddit

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ratrustle wrote...
    I would love to go off this cliff!
    December 27, 2012 11:35 am
    I personally don't mind paying a bit more in taxes if it means that many who've gotten off lightly start paying their fair share or at least something. Maybe it will take a little "tough love" in order to get the government to quit spending like there's no tomorrow -- cause it's tomorrow!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }