First you “lean in,” then you “bend over.” I think the middle class is currently at the latter stage….

“Private options” or none, Obama care is nothing but a big giveaway to Pharma and the insurance industry. Frankly, I can’t spare the energy to oppose these right wing state privatization schemes – the ENTIRE legislation is CRAP! We need single-payer, just like the rest of civilized society.

Maybe I’m just paranoid, but I sense a set-up to repeal the filibuster just in time to pass the chained CPI benefit cuts for Social Security. Obama has had this on his wish list for a long time. If progressive Senators can’t filibuster, it would easily pass with a simple majority.

Be careful what you wish for.

We need to let the Dems know that the “lesser evil” game will not work in 2014. I’m telling my congress critters : 1) I will work to primary you; 2) If you survive the primary challenge, I will vote 3rd party, even if it means a Republican gets elected. If they are not scared sh**less by the thought of losing their jobs, they’ll follow Obama’s plan to scr** the elderly and the middle class.

What really needs to be privatized is the Federal Flood Insurance program, but Obama will not do that because the wealthy and the politicians like having taxpayer subsidized insurance for their beachfront properties, and businesses do not have to bear all of the costs when they build on floodplains.

I expect that the Republican plan was to wait until AFTER the Dems voted for the Great Betrayal, then come out with the “Democrats hate seniors” advertisements. Thank goodness Norquist and Walden jumped the gun, and Democrats up for re-election can see what will happen if they vote for Obama’s Sh**ty budget.

Also nice to here that Obama’s approval ratings are tanking.

Norquist has a problem with the chained CPI applied to tax brackets. I don’t see him complaining about the change as it applies to Social Security. Obama will probably revise his budget proposal to eliminate the tax bracket changes, making his Grand Betrayal even more attractive to Norquist and the Republicans.

Great post, Masaccio.

A more balanced approach to deficit reduction would be to charge those who have received all of the gains from the economy. That would be the top 2%. Instead, Obama wants to increase income inequality by cutting already inadequate Social Security benefits. The chained CPI will also be applied to tax brackets, which will not rise as fast as actual inflation. As a result, the poor and middle class will be spending a larger portion of their income on taxes, leaving less money to save for retirement.

Democrats need to be informed that the people will vote them out of office if they support the Obama budget. Unfortunately, it looks like Reid may be poised to reform the filibuster just in time to prevent any progressives from blocking the budget.

We do need a discussion about income inequality. The cuts to Social Security will INCREASE income inequality, and should be rejected for that reason alone.

Obama’s budget does not eliminate the “carried interest” or corporate welfare. He’s nothing but a Rino.

That’s why Obama wants the Dems to reform the filibuster, temporarily at least – to prevent any liberal Democrat from blocking his entitlement cuts. The filibuster comes in handy when Repugs use it to promote the corporate agenda, but he would not want the same methods available to any liberal congress person.

But Obama is actively seeking to institute chained CPI for Social Security benefits and tax rate adjustments. In the end, I fear that wimpy Reid will cave to the President, as usual.

The chained CPI will be applied to tax brackets, also. If the tax brackets are not adjusted to real inflation, year after year the poor and middle class will be spending a larger portion of the income in taxes. It will not affect the very wealthy, because they are already in the highest bracket, and get most of their income from dividends and capital gains, at a lower rate than regular income tax.

Obama is looking for any excuse to institute the cained CPI. He’ll probably make a deal with Repugs to implement a few temporary tax increases to get the deal done. Once the cuts to entitlements are completed, it will be business as usual – more unpaid for wars (Africa, this time), and more corporate welfare.

Grayson and Atrios have the right idea. Also, with over 100% of the productivity gains going to the top 5%, we need to have a serious national discussion about income inequality. Cutting SS benefits will only make that inequality much worse.

Obama intends to keep offering cuts to Social Security and Medicare until the Republicans accept the cuts. I suspect the sequester agreement was designed solely to get Americans to accept these cuts. Once that’s accomplished, we will likely see even more tax cuts for the very wealthy, along with a new attitude that “deficits don’t matter.” Neither the Dems nor the Repugs are on the side of the people.

Don’t forget, throwing Grandma under the bus also allows the continuation of that totally useless and unjustified “carried interest” deduction for the hedge fund industry. Obummer suggests the deduction be eliminated, but only because he knows that Wall Street, who dictates his actions, will never let go of that tax windfall.