.
Feedback

Do You Like the Fiscal Cliff Deal?

The agreement reached between the White House and Congress doesn't address spending cuts and leaves another potential debt limit showdown. Is this a deal that works for you?

 

After marathon holiday negotiations, grumbling by liberal senators and after a near-revolt by conservative representatives, the "fiscal cliff" deal was approved by the House of Representatives late Tuesday night. 

The bargain will increase taxes on income above $450,000 for families, increase capital gains taxes, permanently fix the alternative minimum tax, change the estate tax and provide some changes in deductions. It also will extend unemployment benefits, earned income tax credits and other tax breaks for the working class. The Washington Post has a cheat sheet with all of the details.

Middle class taxpayers will still see a smaller paycheck in 2013; The payroll tax cut was not preserved as part of the fiscal cliff deal. That tax specifically pays into social security. If you make $50,000 a year, the payroll tax increase will cost you about $1,000. That has some liberal economists upset with the deal.

What do you think? Did the president give away the store by moving the top bracket tax increase from $250,000 to $450,000? Did House Republicans lose out by pushing spending cuts down the road by two months? Or is this the sort of compromise you were waiting for? Tell us your thoughts in the comments section below.

--


Peter Cook January 3, 2013 at 06:10 pm
You mean the two month sulk by the losing party that its man didn't wn the White House is finally over?
JDavies January 4, 2013 at 02:03 am
My taxes are unceasing about 1,000 a year so I can help save the spotted owl society or let 16 year old teenage mothers in Kansas stay go on welfare and try to get on a reality show. Americans have to rely on congressmen and Senators to make a deal with so many hidden agendas inside. Democrats please stop spending and taxes will not increase! One of my favorite quotes " But in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes" BF
Bob Goedjen January 4, 2013 at 04:53 pm
Absolutely not! We are spending way too much and nobody in congress appears to have the courage to say STOP spending. Very poor decisions.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Los Altos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Nancy Morimoto June 11, 2013 at 05:26 pm
For all skill levels. (I got cut off.) Kids' hear athlete's inspiring stories and sing fun songsRead More too. See www.unionpc.org for details and registration forms.
Another shot of the Kinder Area
David June 16, 2013 at 03:04 pm
You can calculate the interest rate from the chart of the next page (page 31 in PDF). The principalRead More is shown as dropping each year, for 2012 $151,303. The interest paid also drops, in this case by $7303 for an effective interest rate of 4.826% I am wondering if LASD owns some other property in LAH, since the lease to Waldorf would have to go for more than 30 years in order for the lease-leaseback lease to end before it is up.
David June 16, 2013 at 03:53 pm
Happy Father's Day everyone. Enjoy the day with your kids. Since that doesn't apply to me, I'mRead More going to keep digging up minute facts about how the district manages its facilities. I'm sure I'll dig up something to spin around out of context, distraction, or to ramble. So stay tuned!
David June 16, 2013 at 05:59 pm
Now that Raynor specifically has been ruled out, I am re-posting this article which had previouslyRead More included many images of the Raynor site. The thoughts it contains are still applicable, as Raynor was just an attempt at saving money on a new site, purportedly one of the lease costly ideas LASD Board members could locate. The new home of the article is here: http://losaltos.patch.com/groups/lasd-faciliites-growth-issues-discussion/p/lasds-plan-for-new-campuses_8265249b
David June 7, 2013 at 11:58 pm
Oh and they also take a spelling of "its" and put [sic] after it because they think theRead More possessive pronoun is spelled it's which is a common mistake. :) Since they cannot spell, they must be wrong.
David June 8, 2013 at 12:05 am
LASD wasn't faced with spending $20M on lawyers vs $200M on real estate. They think they can useRead More Raynor and keep the cost for one school down to $50M or so, but that will never be used by BCS. It will end up being either ruled illegal or it will be an albatross around the district's finances for years to come. They'll blame BCS for the stupid move. But what is really important is that ongoing legal battles or not, BCS had agreed to accept the split if only $500K more were spent on getting Blach into shape. While the only firm committment was for 1 year, it was obvious that LASD could have come back and gotten that agreement set for 3 years, by which time all sorts of dust would have settled. That was a wise option, and by far the cheaper one. There can always be new lawsuits. What you need to worry about is this years, just like the facilities process for charter schools.
Joan J. Strong June 8, 2013 at 12:35 am
Just because there is no rule requiring something doesn't mean there's necessarily a rule forbiddingRead More something. Otherwise walking with shoes on would be illegal. BCS has never, ever, ever agreed to "accept the split". That is a lie that the BCS regime and their sycophants repeat ad nauseum, but it's still a lie. Earlier this year they crafted a counter-offer over which they ALL BUT PROMISED TO SUE over. They carefully worded it in such a way that would be 100% consistent with a lawsuit over their very own counter-offer. In other words, BCS said, "if you don't accept this counter-offer that goes above and beyond the legally necessary facilities... we'll sue.... if you accept it... we'll sue anyhow". They think we're stupid. We're not.
David May 31, 2013 at 12:57 pm
Are you talking about having an associate teacher at each grade level or about the provision of aRead More special education aide for each grade level? Either one is very different from LASD but if you mean both that's very interesting. The aides are compensated at lower hourly rates than the teachers, but in LASD there is not even 1 full aide per school aside from SDC aides. Egan has no aides and Blach only has 0.80 FTE of aide time.
David May 31, 2013 at 01:12 pm
Oh, there are different kinds of aides. I referred to the 1-1 personal aides above. The resourcesRead More specialist certificated teachers at the LASD schools also work with aides and there are generally between 1 and 2 FTE of that kind of aide time at a school. Interestingly in this category Egan has 1 RSP and 0.8 classified time whereas Blach which has all the Jr High SDC classes not only has the staffing for that, but in the RSP area has 1.6 RSP teachers and 4.1 classified time as well. so more than SDC classes are concentrated at Blach.
Philip Aaronson May 31, 2013 at 01:51 pm
Sorry, yes, associate teachers. These are fully credentialed teachers. It's excellent as thereRead More appears to be much more natural coverage for teacher absences (vs. substitute teachers), maternity leaves, and they can work as aides for 1-1 time as well as an excellent training opportunity for less experienced teachers - all rolled into one.