Obama's Compromise

I think the compromise is necessary and beneficial to the economy in the long run. Those who mistakenly believe that folks are sitting around, living fat & happy on unemployment and are not trying to find a job, obviously have no concept of how hard it is to live on a percentage of your previous income. They also have failed to notice the lack of jobs in this country and the stiff competition for every opening. Yes, there are some pockets where jobs remain unfilled but those are few and far in between because, in the majority of cases, applicants are competing against an average of 6 or more others for every open position. This is clear whenever there's a job fair anywhere in this country...the lines of job hopefuls are long. Delta Airlines announced that they were hiring 1,000 flight attendants last week and over 100,000 people applied. This extension may give employers the confidence they need to hire which will help to boost the economy in many ways. Once that ball gets rolling, perhaps we can recover from this recession instead of continuing to sink even deeper.

I think the compromise was a necessary evil but I stand behind the presient. I'd rather see the tax credits to the richest of the rich end. I'm not a fan of "trickle down" ecomonics and I don't understand how anybody can be. Frankly, the only things that ever trickled down were minimum wage, no benefit jobs that split this country into super rich and third world poor and now even those tricklings are being outsourced. As far as I'm concerned, this philosophy of giving the rich benefits to aid working people is the major cause of the demise of the middle class. Still, I really think it was necessary to do whatever it took to extend those UC benefits. Too damn many Americans were facing a Christmas without money and a hard cold winter without fuel and food. I think the president did what he had to do and sometimes that leaves a bad taste but that's the compromise that politics is all about.

That is not a good deal. For instance extending the unemployment benefits will discourage the unemployed from working. There is no provision for unemployments being cut off if you do not try to find work or if you do not accept a similar in that field. What will happen is that many of the unemployed will wait until the unemployment benefits run off, therefore ;increasing the benefits. The trouble is that if that compromise had not been accept when the New Year runs around, that everyone;s taxes goes up. I do think that estate tax should be extended. And by not extending that, he is making sure that the government can take over the businesses and the property that did not have enough left over after paying the estate tax to hand their business or property to their heirs. That means that if Smith and Smith owns a business, when they die, it no longer will belong to the Smiths, but to whoever will buy the businesss and guess what that person might be a government man. Therefore the government gets bigger and people smaller.

Actually, the estate tax is being cut since it was scheduled to go back to 55% on over $3 million but will instead be 30 or 35% on over $5 million. The treasury will take quite a hit on that deal and heirs and heiresses like Paris Hilton will never have to be productive TAX PAYING members of society if they choose to simply live off their inheritances for their entire lives. I mean, that's ONE way to look at it! Basically, I'm relieved they reached a compromise, whether our cry-baby future Speaker refuses to utter the word or not. It really irritates me when people insist the unemployed don't want to work. Sure, there are some who are probably happy to sit back and collect until they can't anymore but the overwhelmingly majority of them would prefer working to collecting checks that are usually far less than they earned not to mention the lost health benefits for many of them. I think some people forget that we actually pay in to unemployment insurance so there will be help if we end up out of work. I've talked to many people who had never collected in decades of working and now they're in danger of having no income whatsoever. I've heard it said there are at least five people for every available job and it seems about right from what I've seen personally. Most of those who have found jobs have taken large cuts in pay and benefits with some not even able to find full time work. Many have to travel further to work for considerably less money, so they're taking a double hit at best. "It takes a little to get a little." I like that, it's true! Annie

I see this as more of a Republican compromise than an Obama compromise. What good is this plan when people who could be employed get to be idle on the backs of the working? I'm not trying to be unkind to those who are diligently seeking work, but I bet all of us have heard about those who are content to remain unemployed and receive government assistance until those funds dry up. After they're no longer getting government assistance, then they'll make the effort to look for work. What would be most fair for everyone and it would mean everyone (even those on government assistance) would be paying into the system, is to implement the Fair Tax. I know the politicians don't like this program because they think they'll lose their power, but it really is the fairest way to tax everyone. Get rid of the Federal Income Tax and implement the Fair Tax.

I think Obama got the better end of the deal and the Libs ought to shut the heck up. I'm unhappy with the compromise, because I don't think an extension of the tax cuts for two years is enough to convince any businessman/woman to invest in his/her company by hiring, buying new equipment, etc. I think extending unemployment is the wrong direction. There ARE jobs out there; they may not pay as much as unemployment in its current form. But if unemployment wasn't there, some of those jobs would be filled. And I'm for retraining, not paying people to sit on their butts. AND I do know some who openly tell you that... I'm hoping come January the whole mess gets put on its head. And I don't care if the President compromises after that or not...I won't be voting for him in 2012, no matter what he does at this point. He's got us in to such a huge mess, I'm not sure I can ever forget that or trust him...

This is a good sign. At least now, he is showing that he is capable of bipartisan wrangling. Sure, the bill is not anywhere near perfect. That would be expecting way too much for his first attempt. But at least he is showing something that we haven't seen before and that in itself is progress. Too bad his party is failing and floundering on the compromise issue. But it will take some time for them to relearn how to compromise after they held the power for so long.

Hi Laglen, I listened to him talk and I get why he compromised. Of course it wasn't what he wanted but it made sense to bend a little for the good of the people. As he said, he is not done with talks about the tax cuts but for the moment, they can wait. The people on unemployment can't wait. I think that under the circumstances that he made the right decision.

I think it is good... Rand Paul said something like ...the most responsible congress is one that shares power and must comprimise to get anything done. If we can finally work together we might be able to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps.