E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS From Msnbc.com's Carrie Dann and NBC's Ali Weinberg
Even as it exposes fault lines in the new Republican caucus, a looming clash over the federal government’s borrowing power could serve as a major bargaining chip for Republicans hoping to force President Barack Obama to green light major spending cuts.
Some conservative Republicans have urged their GOP colleagues to resist raising the ceiling -- which currently clocks in at $14.3 trillion -- under any circumstances. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota is collecting signatures on her PAC's website "to force our elected officials to stop spending cold turkey," and Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina has advocated for a "big showdown" with Democrats by blocking the raise.
But House Budget Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan says that tactic isn't viable. "Just refusing to vote for it, I don't think that's really a strategy," he said, noting that a failure to raise the ceiling could result in the nation defaulting on its debts to investors.
"Will the debt ceiling be raised? Does it have to be raised? Yes," he said at an event sponsored by economics21 and the Manhattan Institute at the National Press Club Thursday.
But Ryan suggested that Republicans can tweak some specifics of the move - how many years the increase covers, for example. And, more importantly, they can tack on requirements for deep spending cuts as a condition of passage. "I want to make sure we get substantial spending cuts and controls in exchange for raising the debt ceiling," he said.
In a letter to Congress Thursday, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner called on lawmakers to act swiftly to raise the debt limit, calling a default "unthinkable" and warning that it could cost "millions of American jobs."
Congress may be able to hammer out a deal on a debt ceiling increase, but Republicans have made clear that compromise with Democrats is still likely to be the exception, not the rule, in the 112th Congress.
House Republicans say they are determined to vote on repealing Obama’s health care reform law, despite CBO estimates that say the bill would actually reduce the deficit by $145 billion by the end of this decade.
Ryan said that Democrats omitted several high-cost aspects of the bill when submitting it to the CBO for scoring, like the cost of implementation and the "doc fix" provision that sustains high levels of Medicare payments.
"It's not CBO that did the book cooking, it's Democrats that wrote the bill that they gave to CBO that cooked the books," Ryan said.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor today called the CBO figure "full of budget gimmickry" and defended the merits of holding a vote to repeal the bill, saying it showed that Democratic-controlled Senate “wants to continue to be the impediment for results."
In addition to a continued battle over the health care law, Ryan said that the Budget Committee would hold "lots of hearings" over federal assistance to fiscally troubled states, adding that a bailout would not be on the table.
"Should taxpayers in frugal states have to bail out taxpayers in profligate states?" Ryan asked, using Indiana and California as his respective examples, potentially foreshadowing a coastal-versus-heartland battle to come.
And the hearings on fiscal issues won't stop there, Ryan added.
Referring to the Fed foe set to become chairman of the House subcommittee on monetary policy, Ryan quipped: "I'm sure Ron Paul has a few plans of his own."
Leave a Comment:
Why the hell would anyone listen to Bachmann? (but then again, who the hell would vote for that door-knob, either??)
dbo
I think that Bachman is a distraction, just like Palin and spending time on either, when neither will be a factor in 2012 is a waster of time.
Like some on both sides of the aisle Ms Bachman likes to hear herself talk
That anyone in the GOP would be willing to shut down government and cause job loses goes to show who is stupid enough to fall into this trap (Bachmann, DeMint), which backfired the last time the GOP tried this.
As for Ryan, though he seems a little more sane, there is no motivation for Dems/Obama to negotiate with Republicans. It is in the Dem's interest to call the Teapublican's bluff and see if they will shut down government and cause job losses.
The biggest expenses are Social Security/Medicare and defense spending. Since the deficits were caused by two unfunded wars, this is the first place to start--end the damn wars.
Those who pay into Social Security are entitled to it, and Medicare is not free either. Aside from paying into it during working years, it is a fee-for-service system. My mother pays premiums of $200/month, and that is on the low end of what seniors typically pay. So cutting these programs would be unethical and immoral.
The reality is, programs like Social Security and Medicare would be just fine if these programs weren't abused. Social Security is being used like welfare and health care programs, not a retirement program as intended.
1) Stop paying separate checks to women who worked little or not at all. If they chose to live on their husband's income during their working years, they should live on the husband's SS check during retirement too.
2) Stop paying checks to minors of deceased parents. Since when was this the responsibility of folks paying into a system for retirement? Take responsibility parents, and get life insurance.
3) Stop paying checks to the disabled, once again often children who have never paid into the system, and even so, SS is intended for retirement. The disabled should be in a fee-for-service health care program--oh, but Republicans don't want a health care program.
Instead of health insurance reform, get rid of the middle man insurance companies completely, and make all health care providers non-profit. Health insurance agencies have been lining their pockets and doctors have been profiting from the sick long enough. It is immoral. Furthermore, doctors have scammed Medicare into the ground. Enough!
So while we're at it, stop loopholes for the self-employed and private business owners like doctors, lawyers, and investment bankers who self-report (lie about) their income as no income or even a loss. This is the second level of fraud being committed by the well-to-do against the middle class W2 workers.
These folks in the richest 2% don't deserve breaks. End the cuts on dividends, capital gains, and estate taxes. Replace the cap on FICA/Social Security (currently at $106,000) with no income tax on the first $20,000 earned. That way wealth is equally distributed to everyone.
There, now Teapublicans have the cuts they need.
True patriot
You understand that if the debt ceiling is not raised and the U.S. defaults on it debts and the good faith and credit of the U.S. is destroyed that the consequences will be much more serious then shutting the government down for a few days.
There will be global consequences and generational consequences in the U.S.
I think that tying specific cuts and budget changes to the raising of the debt ceiling is good policy for the country in addition to being a good leverage point for Mr Ryan to use.
What say you
Article about the new Speaker of the House passing out checks from Tobacco company lobbyists on floor of House of Representatives:
Some may call it a distortion of the facts, but the man who did it has fessed up. We've all heard the story about the day in 1995 when the Republican leadership handed out checks from the tobacco lobby to members of Congress on the http://dotcommonsense.blog-city.com/john_boehner_handed_out_checks_from_tobacco_industry_on_the_.htm">floor of the House of Representatives. And handing out checks was the then number four ranking Republican.
Today he is the House Minority Leader, and has designs on the Speakership should the Republicans take the House in November. What http://dotcommonsense.blog-city.com/john_boehner_handed_out_checks_from_tobacco_industry_on_the_.htm">John Boehner (R-OH) did in 1995 was entirely against House rules, but it didn't stop him from passing out checks from Big Tobacco when a vote was considered to end tobacco subsidies.
To no one's surprise, the subsidy was saved.
In the video below Boehner admits he passed out checks on the House floor, and offers an explanation.
See the video here:
http://www.zimbio.com/John+Boehner/articles/0cA4itXxoCh/Own+Words+John+Boehner+Handed+Out+Tobacco
"Democrats omitted several high-cost aspects of the bill when submitting it to the CBO for scoring, like the cost of implementation and the "doc fix" provision that sustains high levels of Medicare payments."
Yes, the Democrats told the CBO to ignore the $240 Billion 'Dr. Fix', and to 'assume' that $500 Billion would be cut rom Medicare in arriving at the so-called 'savings' of $125 Billion.
So the actual cost is more like an exctra $615 Billion, not a savings of $125 Billion.
Let's say that our health care insurance costs continue to rise at the same rate that they did over these past 10 years, or about 400%. Right now 250 million Americans are covered by some kind of health insurance. My out-of-pocket costs for my health insurance has increased from $1500/year in 2001 to over $6000/year this year, because in 2001, the only co-pay that I had to pay was for brand name prescription drugs, and our plan had no annual deductible either. For the ease of doing the math, let's just assume that my annual out-of-pocket costs are up $5000 since 2000, and that my health care plan is a middle of the road health care plan in terms of annual costs, even though it is probably a little below the average. In 10 years at our current rate of population growth, America will have approximately 375 million people by 2021 too, but we will not figure-in any kind of growth calculation for the increase in our national population either.
Another 400% increase in the next 10 years would mean an increase of $24,000 per year by the year 2021, to $30,000 out-of pocket per year, which would then be $2500 per month, or double what my mortgage is. Combine this fact with the fact that my wages are only up about 15% since 2000. Frankly doing nothing when it comes to health care reform is an unsustainable course of action, as every year that these outrageous costs increases continue, more and more Americans can no longer afford health care coverage. But let's say that all of us will still be able to afford our current level of coverage in the year 2021, despite the cost increase. What is 250 million people by $24,000?
That's correct: If nothing is done to reform health care, by the year 2021 using an average figure for health care costs, and not including our population growth rate, we will be paying $6 Trillion annually more for health care than we are now. So that big cost increase that you are whining about from what was allegedly excluded from the CBO study is mere chicken feed when compared to a do-nothing approach to health care reform. Does anyone here think that in 10 years that they will be able to afford $2500 per month in annual out-of-pocket costs for individual (non-family) health care insurance coverage? (And that figure is also dependent on no additional increases in annual deductibles or copays beyond the 400% rate of rise over 10 years too).
Yes, if the US is forced into default on our debts, there will be millions of government jobs lost, along with the jobs at thousands of government suppliers and vendors, which will likely be driven into bankruptcy, and our ability to continue to borrow will be severely constrained at a much higher risk interest rate too. The roads are falling apart around here, what will happen after our government can't afford to fix roads or bridges even though we all pay fuel taxes?
How much physical gold, silver, other precious metals, or stronger foreign currencies are you holding for that day when the value of our Dollar collapses?
Go try to spend that gold, fool.
There is a place right near here that buys gold and silver bullion at market price. If our Dollar collapses, it may very well eventually be that many to most stores may refuse to honor the paper Dollar in favor of hard currency instead.
The debt ceiling is far too serious to allow Republicans to attach ticky-tack provisions to it. And besides, why would the president or Democrats agree to spending cuts demanded by Republicans when the GOP's health care repeal adds $300 billion to the deficit? How about THEY drop repeal and save a few hundred billion dollars for taxpayers...
The deficit is made up of spending. If we don't stop spending, we will be in a constant cycle of raising the debt limit, increase spending to that level, then cry that it's too important to the country and we must raise the debt limit again. Cut spending, and the urgency to raise the debt limit is reduced, cut it some more and the pressure becomes even less, continue to reduce spending and you know what, we are back in control of the deficit and debt.
The deficit is made up of revenue and spending...there are two components to the equation and they both must be adjusted, spending must be cut and revenues must be raised (that means raising taxes).
Spending cuts will be enacted but the debt limit will still need to be raised. Does anyone think that the results of decreased spending will somehow be available to apply to the nations creditors the same day? Why is it always necessary to have a one word answer to every question, no matter how complicated.
The Republicans have been screaming for 2 years that the spending must stop so they have also had those same 2 years to come up with a plan to address this. As of yesterday they still can give no specifics as to what, where or how much. They set a very high bar while campaigning and are quickly lowering that bar . Now they want to play political games with the debt limit.
"Should taxpayers in frugal states have to bail out taxpayers in profligate states?" Ryan asked. In order to remain the "United" States of America, the answer is sometimes yes.
Actually, with the R's in control of the House, why don't the D's all vote to NOT raise the debt ceiling? This would force Boehner to responsibly "herd the Rebublicats" so that he NEEDS all the R's to vote for raising the debt ceiling. The R's would actually have to raise the debt ceiling or destroy the creditworthiness of the USA by defaulting. Otherwise the D's just leave this as a Republican "wedge issue" in the next campaign, getting blamed once again as "tax & spenders" (which BTW, the R's are even bigger spenders than the D's).
As everyone (except the last President) says, "Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me."
Matt
The debt ceiling and the deficit are two entirely different things and should not be confused.
vwterry
You are right about the debt ceiling and its consequences, but as to the specifics of spending cuts, can we also expect an advance copy of the state of the union speech to see the President's ideas for the budget. The Republicans will release their spending cut plans when they are ready to do so. AS to the bankrupt states, maybe their cuts need to be deeper then those in states that are more fiscally sound.
jcbwell
That would be really responsible governing. Do you think or do you believe that the Democrats in the House believe that the U.S. should default on its obligations. If the answer is no then they cannot in good faith vote to not raise the debt ceiling. This is about the country it is not a political football to be kicked back and forth.
This will show us who are really the adults in the room and who is there simply to play politics.
I hope both sides realize the severity of this situation.
You are absolutely right. To believe that these guys suddenly have the ability to fix the mess they and the previous administration had a gigantic part in creating is lucicrious. I find it extremely interesting that they are all suddenly tongue tied when asked for the specifics. Further, to believe that Bachman is capable of sitting on the intelligience committee, is an oximoran (hope I am spelling right). Still she is the darling (along with sister Sarah) of many republicans. This is change we think we need? Seriously? I think not.
mattpfl wrote
Ok, so how about they drop repeal of HCR and use the hundreds of billions saved to fund.... a tax cut.
Regards....
Paul Ryan sounds like a voice of reason but I have no doubt, the GOPTP is looking for a way to hold the debt ceiling hostage until they get something they want. I also have no doubt that "something" will add to the debt or cause harm to the 98% of Americans who do not earn close to $250,000 a year. I simply do not trust them.
FR: House Majority Leader Eric Cantor today called the CBO figure "full of budget gimmickry"
That kinda makes one go hummmm, it not transparent.
So is that why they won't let the CBO SCORE it so they can jam it down our throats ?
"jam it down our throats". Catchy. Where did you get that, Beverly? It sounds vaguely familliar somehow?
Bev
It is pretty well known that the CBO scores a bill's cost or savings potential based on the assumptions and parameters provided by those submitting the bill. Those parameters and assumptions are always the best case scenario from the submitters point of view.
That is what Mr Cantor was referring to.
The Republicans have produced CBO projections in the past that no one on the left believed in the exact same manner.
This is nothing new and something done by both parties.
The truth as in most things is somewhere in the middle of what the two sides say.
I would say that often as not, the truth has no relation to what either side says.
However, the CBO is still a better source than any of the partisan hack "think tanks" out there.
Why would the GOPTP need to hang a bunch of gimmicks on it? The budgetary authority is theirs...just do what they promised.
Paul Ryan is indeed one of the voices of reason on the Republican side and he knows very well that the debt ceiling will have to be extended. He also wants to have specific spending cuts and budgetary changes agreed to part and parcel to the raising of the debt ceiling for a specific period of time.
By that he means the ceiling will likely not be raised as much as some might like, requiring a return to the issue if the agreed upon spending and budget cuts are not enacted into law.
This is a wise choice of action, to insure that both sides will be serious about cutting spending, reducing the deficit and paying down the debt. I would look for the new COS Mr Daley to be very involved with the Republican and Democrat leadership in the House and Senate in getting the appropriate spending cuts and budget changes aligned .
There will be some number of people on both sides who vote symbolially against raising the debt limit. President Obama did in 2006 and called it a necessary vote to protest the failure of leadership. There will be others that do and say the same this time, but the debt ceiling will be raised.
Everyone is falling into the Repubican trap of only focusing on the spending part of the debt and not the revenue side of the equation.
We should be talking about eliminating corporate well fare which stimulates nothing no matter how often Fox, Beck, Palin, Rush etc... tells us it does
It is a joke that hedge fund managers making hundreds of millions of dollars every year get to declare all their income as dividends and subjected to a measly 15% tax rate. It is a joke the companies are allowed to hold millions upon millions of dollars in profits in off shore accounts to avoid paying Taxes.
We need to ween the Republicans off of all that special interest money so they can start to focus on the other 90% of America that can't contribute millions to their campaign
wolfman
While I do not understand why you ind the need to use Fox News as part of your argument, I agree that there need to be some revenue discussions in the near term as well. And then we need to get some real tax code reform done in 2011 to make sure things continue on the right track.
Until the tax code is changed, the dividend and capital gans nature of hedge fund taxing is the law of the land and it is not changing until and if the tax code is revised.
We need to wean the government off deficit spending (Republicans and Democrats) and learn to live within our means and that may mean we need to expand our revenues to do so.
This is not a partisan but rather an American problem, we need to accept that and address the solution as a nn partisan requirement for the survival of our country.
We need to create an environment where businesses can grow, foreign businesses come in, new businesses spring up, and Americans go back to work. That will generate far more tax revenue than any tax increase. The U.S.A. has too high taxes as is. A tax increase will only be a detriment to future growth.
The GOP has no one but themselves to blame if they don't like the health care law. They contributed exactly NOTHING to it although they had the chance.
They had their chance from 2001 on!
smartblonde
Sadly you really believe what you posted.
What the Republicans are doing with the repeal (and I do not agree with this process either) is pretty much how the health care bill was really put together and passed in the first place. There may have ben hearings but no real input was wanted or taken.
Good question Mr. Ryan, but consider this:
And what they also won't tell you is that is the prime way to go after the Public Worker Unions. Shocking they want to take away more from Middle Class Working America to support their rich buddies.
They fail to remember that America prospered in the past pre 1980 because workers won rights and benefits and won fair treatment. Going pro-business = destruction of Middle Class America
wolfman
What do you say to Cuomo and Brown (Dem Governors in two of our biggest states) both identifying public sector unions as significant parts of the fiscal problem their states are facing?
Public employee unions are leaches that steal tax dollars. There is no need for public employees to be unionized.
If you really believe the deficit is too big, then cut spending. Voting against raising the debt ceiling is just a way to look good to voters without having to make the tough decisions about HOW to cut spending.
Now there is a real joke... "cooking the books".... why in the heck do you think Bush and the GOP made the Bush tax cuts 10 years.... that was no accident.... and the joke that all increases have to be covered by cuts.. but tax cuts don't..... China is way out in front of us on just about everything.... and pretty soon most of Wall Street (the corporations are already there) will be going there also....
The Republicans, by forcing the extension of the Bush tax cuts to the rich will cost the American people as much as 900 billion dollars. Now they want to cut cut cut spending but they do not want to pay for any of the cuts, they want everyone in American who can barely get by to pay. 900 billion dollars could go a long way in cutting our debt ceiling.
Where in the world do you get your numbers? The projected cost for extending the upper end tax cuts for 10 years was estimated to cost around $700 billion by the Congressional Budget Office. For just two years the extension for the upper 2% will cost under $100 billion. The far bigger cost is the extension for everyone else.
Budship
The ten year costs of extending the Bush tax rates (I guess we can call them the Obama tax rates now, since he signed the extension of the tax rates this time) is $4 Trillion dollars, broken down as follows
Earners under $250K $3.3 Trillion and Earners over $250K $700 Billion
The left screamed that not extending the rates for those earning under $250K would be the end of the world and that as you can see is where the bulk of the cost added to the deficit resides. I personally thought that all the rates should have sunsetted.
Tax cuts NEVER cost the American people any money. Only tax INCREASES can cost the American people money. Tax cuts and a debt ceiling CAN reduce the amount of the American people's money the government can WASTE through excessive spending.
The debt ceiling should not be raised. Government must learn to limit spending to no more than it takes in. No more borrowing. No more printing fiat money. Spend LESS. Do LESS. Let the American people keep their own money to spend for their own purposes. Government governs best when it governs LEAST.
When you cut spending, you are cutting jobs. So how does this tie to getting people back to work, which was supposed to be the top priority for the Republicans?
When you reduce the cost of government, you reduce the draw of money away from the private sector. Allowing the private sector to correct itself and grow is where you will see the largest growth in job creation. Keeping government small will allow a growing economy to thrive. Some of these bright minds in the upper half of government departments would better serve the country by being downsized and forming small businesses of their own, where they could then employ others, and earn a living by making money rather than take from the tax coffers. Then, some of the money they make could help to fill the tax coffers.
Get a life you two... the private sector is "awash" in cash and profits (see Fox/Journal/Beck)... they just are creating jobs overseas (see the same source).... and the jobs created in the USA will continue to be "low wage, low skill".... why hire a lawyer in the USA for $100,000 when you can outsource everything to India, China or some other third world country for "peanuts".... If you want to check Fox/Journal you will also find out that the corporate profits are no longer coming in from the USA but overseas... and it isn't going to stop... cut taxes and spending all you want.. but corporations will always go to the lowest cost producer.. and that isn't us... unless you all want us to work for the same wages as Third World Countries.....
It is obvious that there a few states that eventually will turn to the Federal government for a massive bailout. This in turn raises their debt ceiling. This gives those states a green light to keep up their own deficit spending untill they need another bailout, and then another one.
California and Illinois are prime examples. I say let's have a test case where we don't give a dime to any state demanding a federal bailout. Let those states feel some pain...some consequences for their actions.
This would have the added benefit of sending a very clear message to the other states that..No, this is not an escape hatch available to all. Don't even ask.
Run Bachman, run!!!!!! Keep running until you are clearly out of the United States of America!!
Take Palin with you!! In fact, I suggest Russia, it's not far from Palin's backyard!! Hurry up, I'll book you a flight to Alaska!
Cantor, NOW you're a mathematican? Your numbers are not correct! The CBO scoring is. Get over it!
Yeah who exactly gets more per capita of help from the Federal Government?
60% of the American People want taxes increased on the wealthy back to Clinton Era levels. 20% of the American People want the Budget dealt with by cutting Military Spending. 3% of the American People want Austerity and Social Security Cuts. So is Rep. Boehner et. al. listening to the American People? No, they are moving ahead with Austerity and Social Security Cuts. The countdown to the next election is going to start shortly.......
TAX THE RICH !!! Raise the payroll cap - and raise Estate Taxes to 50% for all Estates over $ 10 Million.
DEFICIT AND DEBT PROBLEM SOLVED !!!
I love people saying TAX THE RICH. They are paying it all now, idiots.
How about fair tax. Get rid of the illegals. Unearned Income Credit? Yea lets give someone a $5000 refund who and has paid in nothing. But I PAY FOR THEIR KIDS, FOOD, MEDICAL, HOUSING. Why just because I own a company and have worked my a$$ off.
I would like to see a balanced budget and reduced govt spending. The question is how do we get there without throwing us into another recession?
Nice theory about how cutting govt spending will create more private sector jobs eventually; but it is only a theory, like trickle down economics. Simple fact is that cutting govt spending will immediatley increase unemployment, which leads to less taxes paid and more unemployment benefits.
It is a matter of priorities; let's get people back to work, get past this recession, and then look at how we address other issues. There is no silver bullet; we can not fix everything at once. It took a long time to get into this mess, and without a rational plan, we are not going to get out of it.
Cuba is laying off 500,000 government workers. Even Castro has realized only the private sector can generate economic growth. We're 10 times Cuba's population, surely we can lay off 10 times as many leeches suckling at the taxpayer tit.
Just as long as those "leeches" are the ones providing services to you, right?
The government spends 300 Billion a year on prosecuting pot smokers. Legalize just pot and you save 300 billion, tax it and get 200 billion more. That is a 1/2 a trillion addition to the budget.
It was nice to get a better explanation about why Republican's are ignoring the CBO report. As a Democrat, it's helpful to understand Republican thinking and so far it seems to make at least some plausible sense. Keeping a hopeful open mind.
A few of you say cut government spending, keep government small and the private
secter will create jobs. How does this work?
Poorly.
Why not privatize Public Sector jobs other than Police, Firefighters and Teachers. Bid the jobs out and let the private sector cover the pensions, administration and other costs involved.
Well, public sector jobs cost the taxpayer wages plus materials plus overhead.
Privatized public sector jobs cost the taxpayer wages plus materials plus overhead plus profit for the contractor. Plus diluting accountability.
Privatization is an ideological solution, pure and simple. Another way for the wealthy elites to have their pockets lined at the expense of the rest of us.
Don't believe it? Ask Erik Prince how profitable war can be.
“Debt Ceiling” – Give me a break. There is no “Debt Ceiling” when it’s simply raised each time government overspending nears the “Debt Ceiling”. Rename it the “Debt Target” and at least it there will be some sense of honesty to it.
We have legislators that laughingly talk about reducing the National deficit by pushing spending out to State and Local Government. We have State and Local Government that has already spent itself into oblivion and currently borrowing from future projected tax revenues to balance current budgets.
Republican or Democrat, no matter how you lean, we have bad government at all levels selling bad legislation to the highest bidder and padding good legislation with hidden payoffs that purchase enough votes to pass anything. Democrat or Republican, Federal, State, and Local representatives have spending addictions fueled by addictions to power. A small campaign contribution buys access to boat-loads of taxpayer money while self-proclaimed public servants know exactly what/who/when to invest and where they will land nice cushy jobs if they get booted from office. “Free Market” - my back-side!
Spending less of the money one level could have spent… but doesn’t have, and/or offloading deficit spending to other levels of government that are also broke… INCREASES TAXPAYER LIABILITY. The current numbers speak for themselves.
- $14 Trillion and growing National Debt
- $2.8 Trillion and growing State and Municipal Debt
- $Trillions$ in underfunded/unfunded government pensions
- $Trillions$ of forced employer/employee contributions siphoned from the Social Security Trust to fund general government operations
- Oppressive taxes and government fees (Federal, State, Local, Municipal, Property, School, Utilities, Phone, Fuel, Savings/Capital Gains, Sin, Estate, Amusement, etc., etc., etc.) that currently consume over 50% of the average U.S. workers annual gross salary.
The house of cards is on the verge of collapse and sooner or later as American’s we need to start actually paying the bills. The longer we permit this economic stupidity to continue the more overwhelming the burden - regardless of what our government sponsored economists claim.
For decades, we’ve permitted government at all levels to operate without fundamental budget constraints or accountability. ALL deficit spending/borrowing by Federal, State, and Local Government must stop if the U.S. is going to have any chance of climbing out of the economic disaster of big government.
What mindless sheep the American people have become to be so easily conned into believing that endless escalation of these already massive tax burdens (Government Spending) is somehow a good thing.
Do NOT increase the debt ceiling further; cut spending to immediately stay under the limit, then balance the budget with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases. The amount of Federal debt is out of control. Time to "just say NO"!
We were getting there 10 years ago with projected surpluses (please note I said projected) and we decided to give the American people their money back in the form a tax break. Dems say that's the problem Repubs say it was the Dems uncontrolled spending that was the real problem. George W. Bush never exercised is veto power on any spending bill that was brought forward during his entire 8 years as President. So if you are going to cut taxes and you have the veto power to cut spending it would appear to me that was the time to say NO.