The Thursday wrap
The Tax Policy Center calculates that the fiscal cliff deal will, on a percentage basis, see workers making $30,000 “take a bigger hit” than those earning $500,000. The former will see taxes jump 1.7 percent while those in the latter group will see taxes increase by 1.3 percent. “Progressivism” in action once again. ... The New York Times' resident European socialism economics columnist (hint: Paul Krugman) has rejected any notion that he should be this nation's next secretary of the Treasury. Not that anybody offered him the job. “Progressives” not only are economics ignorami, they're modest, too. Ahem. ... House Speaker John Boehner says President Obama continues to insist that the federal government doesn't have a spending problem. The president blames the Deficit That's Eating The Nation on rising health care costs, which, of course, because of the specter of ObamaCare are rising even more. Which suggests Mr. Obama audited Critical Thinking 101 through 405. ... The folks at AccuWeather say you'd better enjoy the January thaw because a pretty brutal dose of Arctic air isn't far off. And they go as far as to suggest “folks may want to check their supply of fuel for the second half of the winter sooner rather than later.” As we like to say, “Honey, get ready to throw another log on the fire, it's going to get cold outside.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Chicken Littles can’t cluck away climate facts
- Harrisburg escapades: Come clean
- Pittsburgh Tuesday takes
- Alle-Kiski Tuesday takes
- Common Core: Rotten politics
- Alle-Kiski Laurels & Lances
- U.N. watch: The missiles question
- Greensburg Tuesday takes
- Public records: Updates needed
- Police vests & big hearts
- Merging school districts? Some fundamental criteria