More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
HuffPost TV

HuffPost TV

Posted: December 9, 2010 12:20 AM

Arianna appeared on "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell" to debate the deal between the White House and Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts by two years in exchange for a one-year extension of unemployment benefits.

"The main problem with the deal is that it doesn't create jobs," she said.

She went on to criticize Larry Summers for his comments that failing to reach a compromise would send us into a double-dip recession, saying, "Today he fear-mongered...it reminds me of the fear-mongering that went on before the Iraq War."

Watch the full segment:

 
Arianna appeared on "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell" to debate the deal between the White House and Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts by two years in exchange for a one-year extension of ...
Arianna appeared on "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell" to debate the deal between the White House and Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts by two years in exchange for a one-year extension of ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 513
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
11:37 AM on 12/12/2010
If police repeatedly allowed kidnappers to successfully ransom hostages only to pick up their dead bodies off the road we would have to start suspecting the police of somehow receiving a cut in the ransom. Why else would they insist on continuing a failed policy with such horrible consequences? Likewise the Democratic Party's practice of consistently acquiesing to Republican demands over the wishes of the electorate has started to smell of collusion. If President Obama and the lesser Democratic elite such as O'Donnell wonder why the American public's mood has turned angry it is because we don't trust them to act in our best interests anymore. Just as we apparently cannot trust O'Donnell to speak the truth when it runs contrary to the interests of the Democratic Party.

We need more people like Alan Grayson in politics, not less.

¹Some currently not paying taxes could see their tax burden increase if the current tax rates revert back but determining the actual net increase is well beyond the ability of this writer. The assumption that someone with no taxable income would not be impacted by an increase in their tax rates, however, is a perfectly valid and reasonable assumption.

²2008 tax year figures provide by the National Taxpayers' Union
11:36 AM on 12/12/2010
With one out of five Americans now in jobs which don't meet their needs or without a job at all isn't it reasonable and right to ask those who still have a job to dig into their pockets a little and help out during these hard times? I think so.

Even worse the blithe way O'Donnell shifts the blame of threatened unemployment extensions and safety nets from Republican responsibility to Democratic dissenters such as Alan Grayson is the reason for the mass abandonment of the Democratic Party this past mid-election. We, the rational and educated, should stand with Congressman Grayson and vehemently repudiate the offensive Republican practice of holding our social safety net to ransom. We don't give in to criminal or terrorist demands and neither should we cave to Republican extortion on the same principles. (Cont'd)
11:33 AM on 12/12/2010
Yes, it is an increase, but one spread proportionately amongst the population according to their relative ability to pay. Hardly the gotterdammerung O'Donnell portrays it to be.

But in my opinion O'Donnell's most egregious failure is not his deliberately distorted math but the absence of any sort of basic principals or ethics contained in his position. His argument rests on nothing but expediency, self-gratification, and a misdirection of his viewers' anger. Take, for instance, his seeming insistence that the American middle class shouldn't be paying any more income tax than it already does. Of course the only alternatives today are to allow our economy to implode, pass the deficits onto coming generations, or hand our essential services over to the tender mercies of corporations. As a progressive who thinks corporations already have far too much influence in this country that leaves us with no choice at all – we have to run deficits. But is it right we pass on the entire bill to our children and grandchildren? Today the top 10% of the taxpayers pay 70% of our personal income taxes². That leaves the next 40% of taxfilers paying the remaining 30%. At the very least this 40% aren't paying their share. (Cont'd)
11:30 AM on 12/12/2010
O'Donnell's position is equivalent to saying a 50% increase in the price in movie tickets is the same as a 50% increase in mortgage rates and that's not right. The former might very well cause the family to cancel movie night, but the other is a disaster. Income taxes are very much the same – most Americans pay little or nothing in taxes while others pay more substantial sums. The key reference point is the actual amount of taxes paid. According to The Urban Institute and Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center in 2009 the median income of a family of four in the United States was $75,954 who would have incurred federal income taxes of $3,517 (4.63%). Thus the tax increase for this middle-of-the-road family if the tax cut was allowed to expire would be around $1,000, or about a hundred dollars a month. The same family with half that income ($37,977) on the other hand receives a $3,144 subsidy (i.e. a government handout or a negative 8.28% tax rate). Obviously any tax increase would have little or no effect on them. They don't pay taxes. And yet they are still in the top 50% of American incomes. Anyone with even less income doesn't pay taxes either¹. So the actual cost to American middle and lower class taxpayers of allowing the tax cut to expire can vary widely from nothing at all to amounts which would be measured in the hundreds of dollars. (Cont'd)
11:27 AM on 12/12/2010
This morning I sat in stunned disbelief watching a clip of O'Donnell verbally assault Alan Grayson Wednesday night for his willingness to allow taxes to rise rather than pass President Obama's proposed bill. But it was not his argument's underlying premise which raised my ire. The majority of my outrage came from O'Donnell's blatant hypocrisy and deceit regarding the matter.

O'Donnell pointed out to Grayson that the five percent increase in the lowest income brackets means a 50% increase in their tax rate – a far more burdensome shift in taxes, he argued, than that which would hit the rich – and by not voting for the bill Grayson would be responsible for unfairly taxing the middle class. To those uninitiated in finance who don't look very closely this argument may sound persuasive. But to those more comfortable with numbers (and as a former tax policy advisor O'Donnell should surely be counted among them) this is pure, unadulterated bunk. An outright misrepresentation of reality used to ambush a guest with an indefensible strawman argument.

First O'Donnell mixes 'apples with oranges' when he uses the percentage increase (50%) rather than the absolute increase (5%) applicable to the lowest tax bracket. By doing so he deliberately distorts the impact of taxes reverting back to their Clinton-era levels. I'll illustrate this deceit by way of an example. A family has two expenses: every month they pile into the car and see a movie and every month they pay their mortgage. (Cont'd)
07:45 AM on 12/12/2010
Each party should make it clear on whose behalf they are bargaining. There is only one piblic paying taxes.
photo
AGammaRaye
Awake!! Independent.
10:54 PM on 12/11/2010
I don't mind the passion and fire --even if its over the brink at times, as long as its sincere not just Boehner type theatrics...and ultimately good manners return and civil people get back on track. I keep hoping reality returns and this pervasive grab it-greedy mindset softens and we act more humanely to our fellow man. How much is enough keeps knocking on my mind. The Madoff' saga an example to heed. That we have become so dismissive of the less fortunate among us with Breweresque death sentences favoring algae research instead nd the 99'ers forgotten but two examples.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ManwithaParachute
Not Seeking Your Approval
02:29 PM on 12/11/2010
Why is it that the Dems cannot pass this bill through Reconcilia­tion?
12:25 PM on 12/10/2010
Nowhere can I find Grayson's response. How incredibly unfair. O'Donnell's rant was ridiculous and shameful.
12:19 PM on 12/10/2010
I wanted to hear Grayson's response.
photo
RickyPoo
In Brightest Day, In Blackest Night...
12:00 PM on 12/10/2010
Arianna nailed it.

This ridiculous DC Kabuki dance about taxes will do NOTHING to create jobs. Indeed, it might make matters worse.

But a couple of the DC Kool Kids got to slap around the B@ggers' fave whipping boy, Alan Grayson, so all is right with the world and this made for "great television".

Gag me....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:35 PM on 12/11/2010
So this was a show aimed at teafolk? I didn't think so.
10:27 AM on 12/10/2010
Lawrence O'Donnell is the MAN.  He talks reality - just like the President.  The checks for the lowest earners would have been significantly lower on 01/01/2011 and millions of unemployed would not have been able to pay their bills (including mortgages --> more foreclosures). Both would have been disastrous to those families and to the economy.

The Democrats could have dealt with this before the election.  They didn't and in the last few days of the years, the President didn't have a choice but to work with what he had - which is a whole slew of right-wing Republicans coming into Congress in January.   He is President of all the people and he got a pretty good deal (not great) but doable. 

Blame the Republicans who won't budge (you know they won't) and the Democrats who didn't want to vote on this before they went back to the voters in November.  Our representatives are more concerned with politics than their constituents - shame on the lot of them.
photo
pdsimdars
Steel spine and golden aura.
06:09 PM on 12/11/2010
What about that Huffpost article that says, when you crunch the numbers, those middle/lower income earners will also be losing some tax breaks and when you calculate it out, 1 out of 3 will have to pay HIGHER taxes. It is only the RICH who are guaranteed to get the fat tax relief. Read more.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LonosCurse
Some may never live, but the crazy never die
11:01 PM on 12/11/2010
If you look hard enough, there's an article that covers every angle.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kiku
02:56 AM on 12/10/2010
Very weird that Arianna is bringing up Beohner as the champion of the middle class, and a lost opportunity. Beohner is currently pretty irrelevant in the House right now, Pelosi can get through good liberal legislation. The problem has always been with the Senate, which Beohner has no influence over.

Arianna is also wrong about the jobs. Economic studies show that the best stimulus for our economy is food stamps, as that money circulates through society the most, creating the most jobs. The worst place to put money is in corporations with corporate tax cuts, as they already have loads of money they aren't spending.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Electroguy
Not a Repub, Not a Dem, Somewhere in the middle.
02:38 AM on 12/10/2010
After watching this video, Lawrence O'Donnell is my new hero. And I am a conservative. Someone should have told Alan Grayson this LONG ago..
photo
lvrose3
Las Vegas,NV
11:51 PM on 12/09/2010
Tonight, Lawrence has Rep. Grayson back on, and he's (lawrence) apologizing for his rude behavior last night. That's nice.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:42 PM on 12/11/2010
Good, because he was channeling Bill O'Reilly. I wouldn't watch that show.