Americans worried that 'fiscal cliff' could bite
0 Comment(s)
Print
E-mail Xinhua, December 30, 2012
Walking out of New York Downtown Hospital, Sheryl Joe, a 65-year-old African-American woman who lost her home in the city due to Hurricane Sandy, was worried about any changes to the Medicare program, a national social insurance package that every U.S. citizen is supposedly entitled to, before the "fiscal cliff" which Obama and the Congress are forced to deal with at the end of 2012.
"I hate to say this, but I'm gonna say it. Don't depend on the government," said Joe in cold December wind. "Don't be at the mercy of the government, but see what they have to offer, so that whether they jump off the cliff or not, you'll always have something."
Joe did not say this for no sound reason. Actually, cutting spending, including social welfare, is one of the two most urgent problems, the other being increasing taxes, that the Democrats and the Republicans are fighting over in front of the so-called "fiscal cliff."
It is a financial term popularized by U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to describe the foreseeable crisis of a potential economic recession in the beginning of 2013 caused by abrupt tax changes and spending limits to meet Obama's goal of deficit deduction.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a series of statistics to describe the fiscal cliff: up to 3.4 million people may lose their jobs; the unemployment rate may rise to 9.1 percent from the current 7.7 percent; the cliff can cost as much as 671 billion U.S. dollars.
For Joe, if the government decides to save some spending by raising the age requirement for Medicare from 65 to, say, 66, she will be "very upset." But she will feel the other way if Obama lets the rich people pay more taxes.
"The rich have gone on too long without, you know, being responsible for taxes," she said. "I think it is a good thing for the rich to pick it up."
However, the standard of "rich" can differ greatly among people with varied income levels. To a father of two young sons who came to the Times Square Museum and Visitor's Center to write out his modest hope on the New Year's Eve Wishing Wall, which will be fluttered down from the sky to the Square on the midnight of Dec. 31, the thought of being taxed more is unbearable.
"For people like me, every penny counts," said the father who found it hard enough just to raise his two kids. "I don't want to give out more than I have."
Yet for some who earn about 250,000 dollars a year, which in Obama's proposal is the income line separating those who should continue enjoying a tax reduction and those who need to pay more, they are still far from being eligible to be called "the rich."
"In my opinion, you need to earn at least 5 million dollars to be rich. They are the people who should pay more taxes," said Jonathan Markson, a software engineer of Citigroup in Wall Street.
"But the thing is, even if you raise tax on everybody for 100 percent," Markson added, "it still doesn't pay the sixteen-trillion-dollar debt."
"If I get taxed more," he jokingly pointed at Chipotle, the Mexican restaurant where he usually paid less than 10 dollars for a quick lunch, "I can't afford to dine here."
Noah Taylor, Markson's colleague from Canada who was having lunch with him, agreed. "I think the real problem is the entitlement for the seniors. We're paying way too much," Taylor said. "I don't think there will be anything left for me when I grow old."
Not every person who is financially safe shares the same attitude toward entitlement, though. Jerry Beal, a theatrical arts professor at William Paterson University in New Jersey, said he was "all for" the idea of Medicare for seniors, even though he personally didn't need it.
"We're all gonna reach the age one day," said Beal while standing in line at a CVS Pharmacy store to get his medicine. "I don't think any politician dares to touch it. It's like the god of the American flag."
Similarly, San Hander, a 62-year-old New York government employee who works in the health department, said that he was confident that the government "will do the right thing."
"I used to resent paying to the pension from my job, but as I get older, I'm only three years from getting mine. I feel happy that I've contributed to it all these years," said Hander. "You don't think of it that way when you are young."
Hander said that the current healthcare system had many problems, including paying too much for illegal immigrants, but he did not believe the government could easily change it, because it "concerns too many people."
For government employees like Hander, their biggest concern is whether they can keep their jobs. A senior officer from the federal justice system with an annual salary of about 100,000 dollars, who could not reveal his name due to government policy, said that a tenth of his co-workers have already been laid off this year amid talks after talks over the fiscal cliff. He feared that more might lose their jobs after the cliff disputes get settled due to a worsening shortage of money.
Unlike many private sectors that provide beverages and snacks to employees, he has to bring water of his own to work, as the federal government is tightening their spending in every possible way.
Even so, his condition is still enviable in many ordinary citizens' eyes - at least he has a job for now. At the moment, 12 million Americans are still looking for jobs to make a living, though the unemployment rate dropped to 7.7 percent, a reportedly five-year low.
The American people have one more day to go before finding out if Obama will take them off the cliff or keep them on the ground for a little longer. Whatever the result, the coming year 2013 will see some taxes increased, some spending cut, and some people unhappy, for sure.
Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)