Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Bilifuduo (98.20)

That Fiscal Cliff...

Recs

10

July 03, 2012 – Comments (1)

It seems as if political saber-rattling has once again put our economy in a position to deteriorate. A potential fiscal cliff is looming around the corner if some kind of agreement between Democratic and Republican lawmakers is not met concerning the expiring tax breaks and expected spending cuts. The stakes are high; the Congressional Budget Office has predicted the United States would plunge back into a recession at the start of 2013 if an agreement is not met.

Indeed, the ramifications of a fiscal cliff in 2013 would be daunting. In the worst case scenario, it will result in a cost totaling $665 billion, or more than 4 percent of the economy.

The potential for a fiscal cliff has not gone unnoticed. Recently, the IMF Managing Director, Christine Lagarde, urged the U.S. to remove the threat of the fiscal cliff; an IMF statement has stated that the a fiscal cliff amounting to 4% of the U.S. GDP "could reduce annual growth to well below 1 percent, with negative growth early next year and significant negative repercussions on an already fragile world economy."

Also, a recent survey by Morgan Stanley found that 65% of global investors and 71% of respondents in the U.S. think the “fiscal cliff” will cause significant uncertainty in markets for the rest of the year.

Although the chances of lawmakers actually allowing the fiscal cliff to occur are slim, it is evident that the mere continuation of the threat of a fiscal cliff is detrimental to the U.S. and the world. 

1 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On July 03, 2012 at 9:31 PM, awallejr (85.50) wrote:

This whole "fiscal cliff" scare is actually comical.  As for the automatic cuts you are talking a $1.2 trillion set of cuts spread out over TEN years, which amounts to a measely $120 billion per year compared with an approximate budget over $3.6 trillion.

As for the tax cuts, just extend the Bush tax cuts for households earning $250,000 or less.  That is clearly common ground and covers the bulk of the spenders.  Boehner would be hard pressed to oppose that, since as stated, it is common ground.  Also the Govevernment revenues would increase to be used to further lower the deficit.

But, of course, Boehner wouldn't want that without getting his millionaire buddies continued tax cuts as well. 

Just another con being put on the Average Joe.  Query: if keeping taxes low on the rich is neccessary for job creation how come we lost 8 million jobs with low taxes on the rich and only recovered a few million while those same tax cuts were continued?

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement