E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC's Shawna Thomas, Luke Russert, and Kelly O'Donnell
Here's a wrap up of responses to President Obama's budget proposal out today. (For some details on the budget, see First Thoughts.)
REPUBLICANS
Speaker John Boehner (R-OH):
"The president's budget will destroy jobs by spending too much, taxing too much, and borrowing too much. By continuing the spending binge and imposing massive tax hikes on families and small businesses, it will fuel more economic uncertainty and make it harder to create new jobs.
"The president's budget isn't winning the future, it's spending the future. A group of 150 American economists signed a statement sent to the White House yesterday that says we need to cut spending to help create a better environment for job creation in our country. Our goal is to listen to the American people and liberate our economy from the shackles of debt, over-taxation, and big government. That's why the new House majority will vote this week to cut $100 billion in discretionary spending over the next seven months - with more cuts to come - in contrast to the Obama administration, which has proposed no cuts to the current fiscal year's budget while simultaneously asking for an increase in the national debt limit. And in the coming weeks, Budget Chairman Paul Ryan will offer a comprehensive budget for the next fiscal year that will contrast sharply with the president's job-crushing FY12 budget."
Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA):
"President Obama says he wants to win the future, but the future will not be won by repeating the mistakes of the past and failing to live up to our responsibilities in the present. The future will be won by bold and honest leadership that addresses our challenges head on.
"Today, the President missed a unique opportunity to provide real leadership by offering a budget that fails to address the grave fiscal situation facing our country. At a time when unemployment is too high and economic growth is elusive in part because of the uncertainty created by our skyrocketing debt, we need serious reforms that will help restore confidence so that people can get back to work. We need a government that finally does what every other American has to do in their households and their businesses, and that's to live within our means. Instead, President Obama's budget doubles down on the bad habits of the past four years by calling for more taxes, spending and borrowing of money that we simply do not have.
"President Obama has used tough rhetoric about the need to get our fiscal house in order, even assembling a bipartisan commission to address entitlement spending which accounts for more than half of our federal budget including Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Unfortunately, the President again failed to put action behind his words by neglecting to even acknowledge these tough issues that everyone knows drive up our debt and must be reformed if they are to meet their obligations for younger Americans.
"As our government continues to borrow forty cents of every dollar that it spends, our Democrat colleagues have offered no credible plan to get Americans back to work or seriously address our debt. In contrast, House Republicans are fully committed to using every tool at our disposal so that we can boost long-term economic confidence and help businesses to grow. And this week we will cut at least $100 billion of wasteful spending, a first step toward getting our fiscal house in order.
"For years, Democrats have proposed more government spending to create jobs, resulting in the largest debt and deficits in history while unemployment remains too high. Republicans believe in free markets and the ability for small businesses and entrepreneurs to keep more of their own money so they can invest, grow their companies and hire employees. This is the difference, and it will be clearly evident in the coming weeks as Chairman Paul Ryan and House Republicans introduce our own budget, one that addresses the challenges we face so that our children have the same hope, opportunity, and ability to achieve that our parents gave to us and their parents to them."
House Budget Chair Paul Ryan:
"The President's budget spends too much, taxes too much, and borrows too much - stifling job growth today and leaving our children with a diminished future. In this critical test of leadership, the President has failed to tackle the urgent fiscal and economic threats before us."
"Failing to heed the warnings of economists and the demands of the American people, the President's budget accelerates our country down the path to bankruptcy. Far from 'living within its means,' the President's budget puts the government on track to nearly double in size since the day he took office - a direct result of his party's reckless spending spree. His budget destroys jobs by imposing a $1.6 trillion tax hike, adding $13 trillion to the national debt and fueling uncertainty in the private sector.
"We cannot tax, spend and borrow our way to prosperity. Where the President has fallen short, Republicans will work to chart a new course - advancing a path to prosperity by cutting spending, keeping taxes low, reforming government, and rising to meet the challenges of our time."
Republican Study Committee Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH):
"Thanks to House conservatives, the spending culture in Congress is beginning to change. The White House still hasn't gotten the message, however. Even as Americans are looking for Washington to cut back, President Obama wants to burden families and employers with higher taxes, more spending, and more debt.
"The President failed a crucial test of leadership by ignoring the need for reforms that will preserve Medicare and Social Security for future generations. These safety-net programs are in serious trouble without significant reforms, yet this budget has nothing to say about the problem.
"House Republicans are working to reduce spending and put the country's budget back on the path to balance. Americans know that prosperity does not spring from government's power to tax, borrow, and spend. We need to rein in Washington's massive spending deficits and give American job-creators the freedom to grow once again."
Sen. Bob Corker:
"The president has missed an opportunity to show real leadership on the number one issue threatening our country's future. Getting spending under control and reducing our deficit will be difficult without presidential leadership. I hope in the coming weeks he will come to the table in a meaningful way to address these issues," said Corker. "As we approach our debt limit of $14.29 trillion, I see no better time to impose a fiscal straitjacket on Washington. We need to vote on and pass spending cuts this year, and we need to pass the CAP Act Senator McCaskill and I have offered to force Congress to dramatically cut spending over 10 years. By capping spending - discretionary and mandatory - to a declining percentage of GDP, we would put our country on a path to fiscal sanity, while incentivizing Congress to pass policies that promote economic growth."
The Commitment to American Prosperity Act, the "CAP Act," would:
(1) Put in place a 10-year glide path to cap all spending - discretionary and mandatory - to a declining percentage of the country's gross domestic product, eventually bringing spending down from the current level, 24.7 percent of GDP, to the 40-year historical level of 20.6 percent, and
(2) If Congress fails to meet the annual cap, require the Office of Management and Budget to make evenly distributed, simultaneous cuts throughout the federal budget to bring spending down to the pre-determined level. Only a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress could override the binding cap, and
(3) For the first time, eliminate the deceptive "off-budget" distinction for Social Security - providing a complete and accurate assessment of all federal spending.
The Corker-McCaskill CAP Act is currently cosponsored by Senators Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).
Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX):
"President Obama's timid budget proposal represents a missed opportunity to lead. It increases the national debt by nearly $11 trillion, raises taxes, and ignores the recommendations of the President's own bipartisan debt commission. Republicans are ready to show we are serious about making these tough choices and getting the boot off the neck of American entrepreneurs and small businesses."
NBC's Shawna Thomas reports that Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ), vice chair of Budget committee, this morning made brief remarks that set up the GOP's prepared response to the budget with the line that it's "a budget that unfortunately spends a little bit too much, taxes too much and borrows too much again." House Budget Chairman Ryan and Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff Sessions (R-AL) will hold a presser this afternoon on the budget.
"In the preview of what we've seen so far it is a continuation of a, as our chairman has said, a budget that unfortunately spends a little bit too much, taxes too much and borrows too much again," Garrett said. "The President has indicated to us that it's imperative that we sign the raising of the debt limit but at the same time we look at this budget and we see that the debt of the federal government continues to grow at outstanding rates and he's going... to ask us to do so again."
When asked if he sensed there would be any common ground between the GOP and the president on this budget, Garrett couldn't seem to find any this morning.
"Well he, he says that he wants to work with us to begin reigning in spending," Garrett said. "Most of what we have seen as far as preliminary numbers go in exactly the opposite direction. Most of what we've seen is that the actual amount of borrowing will be going, as I said before, in an increased direction and that's why you're actually seeing a doubling of the debt since the time this administration came into office. On the tax side of the equation, the president said he wanted to work with us, basically to place less of a burden on the American taxpayers. But we see here again that it goes in the opposite direction about $1.5 trillion increase in the opposite direction, in that direction, as well. And he also said he wanted to care, as you said, for our future generations, our children and our grandchildren, but this is just going to place even our heaviest burden on them as well. So we're more than happy, I think all of us on our side of the aisle to reach a hand out to the administration to work where we can but there is very little that we see in this so far that there's commonality on spending."
DEMOCRATS
Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-MD):
"Today, President Obama released his proposed Fiscal Year 2012 budget. The president's budget makes the tough choices we need to reduce spending and put our nation's fiscal house in order; in fact, it would reduce our deficit by $1.1 trillion over the next decade. At the same time, however, the budget identifies those investments we need to grow our economy and create jobs-investments in out-building, out-innovating, and out-educating competitors around the world. President Obama's priorities-protecting our fiscal future while investing in growth-stand in strong contrast to the priorities of Republicans. Their spending bill for the rest of this fiscal year would make indiscriminate and short-sighted cuts to the investments our economy needs to stay competitive. I hope that Republicans will, instead, work with President Obama to reduce our deficit without sacrificing America's competitive edge."
Budget Committee ranking member Chris Van Hollen (D-MD):
"The President has put forth a budget that reduces our deficit, while also investing in our future. Two years after the President inherited the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and a structural deficit that came from years of fiscal irresponsibility, we have made progress. But we must do more to invest in job creation and economic growth in the short-term, as well as get our nation on a long-term, responsible path to fiscal sustainability. This budget makes an important step towards both those goals.
"There is no question President Obama has made some tough decisions. But this budget also keeps in mind that we need to make smart choices that will create more jobs, lift up middle-class families, and keep our economy growing. While I don't agree with everything in this budget, it is a responsible place to start. It prioritizes national investments that will help our economy continue to recover and keep America competitive, focusing on important investments in things like infrastructure, education, and research. It also extends tax cuts for the middle class, while rejecting tax breaks for the wealthiest 2 percent. And it represents an important down payment on getting our fiscal house in order.
"The President's budget stands in sharp contrast to the House Republicans' proposed funding bill for the remainder of the year. We need to get serious about debts and deficits in this country - but while Democrats propose smart, precise cuts, the GOP wants to blindly slash in the short-term and has no plan for long-term fiscal sustainability. The President's budget is a responsible proposal that will help America move forward, while the reckless Republican bill will cost jobs and hurt the economy."
Leave a Comment:
President Obama's budget is the equivalent of voting "present". This shows beyond all doubt that the only possible way our country can be saved from looming fiscal disaster, is for a Republican to be elected President in 2012.
Paul Ryan put it best: "Far from 'living within its means,' the President's budget puts the government on track to nearly double in size since the day he took office - a direct result of his party's reckless spending spree."
Could you just imagine if Obama were the CFO of a private company? [I know a bridge too far, but..}
He be fired on the spot for putting for a plan calling for more debt, at the exact same time he calls for cuts.
Hey, yeah! Maybe go back to what it was like during the Bush years, and wind up losing 700,00 jobs a MONTH. But serriously, IF we did elect a republican president, I bet you STILL wouldn''t see a game plan, other than "let's let the wealthy continue to get wealthier, and the hell with everyone else".
Paul Ryan didn' thave to wade into the Whitehouse and stop a pending depression, either, so what's he making all the easy noise about today?
More smoke and mirrors, I thought he quit smoking!
Odd. The discussion was about President Obama's budget proposal, and now someone one wants to talk about Bush . . . . . .
What's Boehner's plan?
Or Cantor's?
Or Corker's, Cornyn's or Garrett's?
They wanted the purse strings, they got them. All I see is standing around whining about President Obama. If they want to do it differently they're in charge of the House, where all bugetary policy begins. Where's their policy?
I love how they call it "deficit reduction" in spite of the fact that the majority of the "savings" come not from actual cuts but simply "freezing" spending at current levels instead of raising them.
"I could have spent more but I decided to just spend like I always spend.... see how much I "reduced" the deficit?"
Steny Hoyer: "The president's budget makes the tough choices we need to reduce spending"
_____________________________________________________________________________________
What makes Obama and the other progressive democrats such blatant, pathological "in your face" liars?
Well, we talk about Bush because it was Bush (Reagan on steroids) and the GOP who spent this country into massive debt, gave unsustainable tax cuts, passed bill after bill of UNFUNDED spending, and started two wars without ever asking anyone to pay for any of it. Now the conservatives complain about spending. Where was the outrage from 2001 through 2008? Conservatives have no clue but do have a lot of hypocrisy.
Jody so glad all of the democrats were in Cancun for the last thirty years so they could proudly say that they were not in office and had no part the out of control spending that is in Washington. So, where do we begin cutting expenses? Do we wait until the finger pointing is over? How about starting now?
The presidents cuts are lame because they attack the workers. Republican ideas are even lamer because they completely screw over anyone who is not wealthy
It's time to tax corps that are not creating jobs in America. It's time to up the social security input to $1 million. it's time to strengthen the middle classes which is the entire foundation of this nation.
The presidents cuts as well as republican cuts do only one thing successfully. They both do more to destroy working Americans while rewarding the greed machine our capitalistic nation has become.
Exactly Jody from Iowa. Bush and the GOP put us in the mess that Obama took over just 2 years ago. If any of you "conservatives" and teabaggers have ever run a large corporation, it take some time to right the ship and steer it in the proper direction. We've gone from a situation of losing 700,000 jobs per month, a financial meltdown, two unfunded wars and an economy contracting by over 6% in the last quarter of Bush's administration. Now we have the economy growing by over 3% annually, job growth (granted it is weak), financial system stability, one war winding down, and businesses making record profits. Your complaints should be directed at those companies for not hiring....but they've found their productivity gains have made it not necessary to hire in order to maintain production levels. So, how do you create jobs in this environment? Where is the proof that government spending stifles job growth....just another Republican myth. Say it enough times and the stupids will believe it.
Gary: Two wars, Halliburton, exhorbitant defense contracts to replace expended weapons, etc (part of the motive for creating the wars). The Democrats have to share their part of the fiasco since they were at least riding shotgun to an administration that was asleep at the wheel (part of Ronnie Reagan's management style).
Innovative ideas eludes conservative economics. other than cuts until the country suffers what I'll call Kwashiorkor. how do grow the economy, how do you compete in this present global economy, how do we own the next economy.
All you hear from conservatives is just cuts. yes cut and kill....just like Gov. Christie killed the Hudson train tunnel that would have guaranteed NJ at least 50,000 jobs. A project that would have paid for itself in the long run.
we did cut under BUSH, what happened. now they've cut again for the super rich with the insane believe that some how they'll create jobs. hey, Speaker Boehner, where are the jobs. This president, on record now, has cut taxes to the lowest ever.
At least there's something positive since he took power, the economy is growing again.
i guess obama putting the cost of 2 wars into the budget had nothing to do with this. where are all the jobs associated with the money we borrowed from china to give tax cuts to billionares? how come so many big companies are making yet another year of record profits but they dont want to pay any taxes? why cant we just eliminate all schools and maybe thje working class wont mind being slaves?
at some point we are going to have an "egypt" moment where all the poor- at least a hundred million shut down everything and tar and feather the rich that have taken everything from them.
if he's going to call it investment, he needs to learn a concept called ROI. Spending 6-7 digits per job isnt a very good "investment."
I'm a moderate, and in general support the president.
On his proposed budget..... It's a non starter. How can adding any more to the defict in the present, get us any further down the road towards reducing and eliminating the deficit.
Pubs nor Dems are going to tell us the truth, in that the country is broke. We won't cut spending and wont raise taxes, thus there is no end in sight to America's financial problems.
" The discussion was about President Obama's budget proposal, and now someone one wants to talk about Bush . ."
Odd, you'd think Republicans would be eager to talk about their economic wizard, George W. Bush.
I mean they did ask Americans to vote for him (twice) and to support his policies (through two terms.) What gives?
Jody,
I have to agree that Bush did spend more than he should have. That was wrong--I admit it. But this is Obama's 3rd budget to the Congress and all of his have been with over a $1 trillion deficit. This one almost 4 times the record budget deficit of Bush--$458.6 billion. That number comes from an MSN article from earlier today.
I don't care who is in office, you can't spend your way out of debt.
Gotta love the $15.6 billion a year the military will cut over the next 5 years. Heck, just cut out one old set of jets and you get that.
And how about that reducing the deficit over 10 years by $1.1 trillion--heck, why doesn't he try and reduce the debt by $1.1 trillion over the next 10 years:)
Bob: Surely, you can't be serious. This budget cuts the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years, cuts $78 billion from defense and even slashes funding for low income assistance programs! I agree, entitlements and tax code reform need work, but those are different conversations. Try to fold them into the budget too and you end up with the same "omnibus" cr@p that failed last time because it was just too complex.
This budget may not cut enough in some areas, but at least it preserves expenditures on education, science and research - all of which are of no importance to the lemmings on the Right.
Bush and a Democratic Senate and Congress put us in this mess! SO, it's both parties fault. Why don't you people get an un-brainwashed life.
Where are the liberals calling for civility?
from Bill--
If this isn't just blatant talk of revolution I don't know what is.
Just more of Obama and his liberal, progressive reckless status fools! Once again, these Democratic career politicians that leech off of the taxpayers don't have enough business or ethical sense to wipe their a*s! It is a shame that politicians (not businessmen) run the country. This proposed budget is one more classic example of this Kenyan-born bastard's complete and utter business ignorance. These kind of vermin make decisions according to what is self-serving to them - not what is right for the country. Just another reason to support the notion that not only do we not want Obama (or any of his like-minded drones) as president of the country in 2012, but Obama should really be impeached not only for lying about his qualifications to be president but for his policies that are destroying our country and the futures of our kids. I despise this lying sack of crap!
Did you read the budget? Or are you just spurting your prepared remark to seem witty?
Try informing yourself first, make comments on the parts your disagree with instead of just regurgitating quotes from other people who probaly ALSO haven't read the budget.
Big Bear I appreciate your continued attempts at civility.
Regarding the thread - It sure is funny that everyone has a complete understanding of the budget proposal, what is being cut what is being raised. In my case, I haven't had the several hours that would be necessary to comment one way or the other. Generally, I will make a point that hard choices are ahead and all the powers that be refuse to discuss raising revenue or drastically cutting from defense. I find it intolerable that Obama would cut more in education grants than in cold war weapon systems.
Looking at the black vs. white comments from the elected representatives above proves the thought process that people have. I noted it the other day in my response to the situation in Egypt.
Democrats good - rah, rah, rah. GOP bad - boo, boo, boo.
"I don't care who is in office, you can't spend your way out of debt."
I just love these little bromides from the right. How's this saying: "You shouldn't cut taxes when spending trillions on invading two countries at once?"
It might interest you to know there was a consensus among economists in 2009 that more spending was needed to stop the recession:
You Lie!
I thought you libbies were looking forward....forward to record deficits and driving this country into further ruin.
Jody and Bill-300,
I know....you hated Bush and want to blame him for everything and unfortunately, like most liberals, you will refuse to analyze the history of the crash and the leading factors.
NAFTA, WTO trade agreements (outsourcing of manufacturing and jobs), banking deregulation (repeal of Glass-Steagall), low income loan deregulation (leading to bad debt) all contributed heavily to the crash.
The Bush administration exacerbated the situation by failing to correct the weaknesses in the previous administration and by putting us in a foreign quagmire, but the root causes should be blamed on Clinton.
Obama's new budget plan is dangerous. How do you increase spending and reduce the deficit? There is only one answer and that is to increase income to a point that it eclipses the increase in spending and there is left over funds to reduce the deficit.
Next beginner question....how do you increase the government's income? By taxing more...and from the looks of this budget, we're all going to be taxed A LOT more. Before you even start with the next defense "but he's only going to tax the rich and the corporations more"....pinch yourself and wake up from dreamland. Do you think General Electric will just absorb the cost of increased taxes? Or do you think they'll increase the cost to the consumer to cover the increased taxes (and probably with an added profit built in)? You and I are going to pay for this bloated budget one way or another.
Obama said that cutting spending involved some tough decisions....too bad he didn't make any.
How about trying a few of these "tough decisions" instead of absolutely avoiding them to appease those that paid to have you elected:
Will he even touch any of these? Not a chance.
Anyone else notice that the only two democrats going on record here are those from Maryland? I see that the rest of them happened to see November's results and are running for the hills.
Amy,
A dysfunctional credit market that started with Jimmy Carter and then brought along further by the next few Presidents that were trying to make sure that everyone had a home or credit to buy more than we can afford.
Maybe if the Federal Government were looking to balance their budget, people would get the idea and stop getting themselves in too much debt. Of course, the regular person can go to jail or lose their homes if they don't pay their bills. Ever wonder what China is thinking, especially if we keep borrowing?
And I thought you liberals were better educated than us common folk. So please feel free to answer the question--HOW DO YOU SPEND YOUR WAY OUT OF DEBT?
I like you response as it is well reasoned and supported by facts. It is a shame that more folks cannot speak to the root causes but rather have the party blinders on. Eliminate entitlements. Flat tax. Deport anyone who is not here legally.
The cure is coming one way or the other. I would prefer to dictate how we take our medicine not simply ignore the 800lb gorilla in the room.
Obama's way of saving money:
He saw a car worth $50,000 but really wanted the car that cost $75,000. He bought the car worth $50,000 therefore he saved $25,000
President Obama was the FIRST to put the two wars on budget. Any talk of this being a Democrat economy is suffering from amnesia and should be hospitalized for having been brain damaged.
JEEZEEE Louise. Does anyone NOT just listen to rhetoric and research this independently???
Any excessive spending was done with SAVING our collective behinds after the Bush debachle.
Upthread, a poster said that there will be an "Egypt" moment and the poor will one day rise up against the rich for all that they've taken from them.
What have the rich taken from the poor? The poor never had anything to begin with. If born into poverty, then I'm sorry, but you lost the birth lottery. Some are born poor, some middle class and some rich. It is up to the individual to climb out of the poor class. In a liberal's mind, the government should throw a bunch of money at the poor to give them a nice life.
It comes down to ambition. You either have ambition or you don't. A poor and ambitious person can work all his/her life and still wind up poor in the end. Or, they might climb into the middle class. And in rare situations, a poor person can become rich. But this depends on the individual, not the government. A poor and unambitious person will remain poor. A rich an unambitious person could drop down a class or two. It come down to ambition.
The poor in this country rarely pay into the system. Yet, they receive almost all of the entitlements. The rich aren't "taking" anything from the poor. They are giving to the poor. And don't even get me started on charity, because the rich are who contribute the most to charity, which benefits the poor.
Ironic that the world of Conservatism scoffs at the proven science of Evolution but bows at the alter of the pseudoscience known as Social Darwinism.
At no point did I scoff at evolution. I do not believe in organized religion. Don't lump me in with the Religious Right.
Despite a concerted effort to rewrite the principles of mathematics and the truth about history from both sides, what we have here is a bunch of talking points with no match to reality.
Those who think that we need to cut spending and balance the budget don't seem to realize that we would have to cut the budget almost 30% (under Obama's very optimistic numbers) to 40% (under more realistic numbers). How they plan to do this with only 15% of the current budget for discretionary spending seems to be mysterious and deep, dark, secret. (They could tell us, but then they would have to kill us <sarc>.)
If we combine all Social Program spending with Physical, Human, and Community Development spending, it still only equals 36% of the total budget (last years - check near the back of your tax form instructions for the receipt/spending breakdown). We would need to default on all of our debt to make up the difference, in order to balance a budget. Or, we could just tell Grandma and Grandpa to get up off of their lazy asses and go greet people at Walmart instead of collecting their Social Security and Medicare? Any of you political jackasses ready to launch that boat?
Or, we could increase revenue....lots of talking points, but lowering the deficit by less than 10% (which is what the prophetic, but poorly defined cuts of the GOP amount to) is cheap indeed. Thumbs down to both parties (full of losers instead of leaders).
Fair enough, Lynchmob.
I stand by my comment in regards Social Conservatives, however.
John B
It's ironic that liberals spout off about being socially progressive yet are narrow minded and sterotypical.
I am a fiscal conservative and hate the direction Obama is taking this country. Yet, I am pro-choice, believe in evolution, would like to see all religion removed from government, and am all for gay marriage. If it isn't in the constitution, then the government needs to stay out of it.
It is good to see so many supporters of the President posting in this forum. I expected to see the tide of angry Republicans spewing empty words about a budget they have not even read yet, but it is grand to find the majority of posts are pro-Obama.
It proves that although closed-minded screamers make the most noise, the quiet majority speaks when it matters most.
Hopefully 2012 will come before Obama ruins us.
Corp tax rates, just like personal tax rates need to have minimum levels where no loopholes will apply. IE. Personal tax rate at 15% which can be lowered to 10% if you contributed to Local non profits etc.
Same thing for Corp tax rates 20%, that can be lowered to 10% through job creation or green energy development etc. The %'s I used, are for example purposes only.
If every one paid their fair share we would destroy this deficit in no time. With the smaller loopholes for corp America their influence in Washington would be diminished as well.
I believe we badly need a truth in taxation policy implemented. Wow could you imagine that, we would actually know the who/what/where/why and when of our tax dollars. No more bait and switches, no more borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, no more smoke and mirrors taxation policies.
For goodness sakes legalize Pot. The tax revenue would not hurt one bit.
2012 and this independent is for Pawlenty.
I'm wondering if the Fair Tax wouldn't answer all of you dreams. You know corporations don't pay taxes. We do when we buy their stuff. Every tax dollar thatthe IRS takes in comes from individual citizens not business. That's what they want you to believe by telling you that those evil corporations don't pay their fair share. As long as you buy that lie we will never control the spending. Because they have convinced a large number of voters to vilify the places where we get jobs they can continue to manipulate the public. The Fair Tax would give power back to the people. When the hidden taxes go away the public will get an eye opener on how much they really pay and the Government takes away. When that happens people will have a reason to pay attention to what Washington spends our money on. Believe me, the Establishment is scared as hell that the mass public would become personally interested in how their money gets blown. You want power returned to the people? Then the Fair Tax is your answer. No loopholes and everyone paying their fair share. Don't like how much your share is? Vote for people who will cut our bloated Gov. down to size. Not with a scalpel, with a chainsaw instead. Might even get a new party out of it. The Buzzsaw Party.
One can dream.
where are the f'n cuts in congress?? free lifetime healthcare, cola every year for retirees, and salaries higher than the private sector......fu*k all these a*sholes, they're the ones that have put us in debt for the last 30-40 years and now we're supposed to bail ourselves out?? what a bunch of frickin' losers...we paid for our social security, you're damn right it's OUR entitlement, keep your hands off, bungholes!!
Obama is the best spender of other peoples money ever. Makes Bush look thrifty.
He has no clue what America needs and keeps going for what the left wants.
$47 billion could be saved each year just by bringing fed salaries in line with the public sector.
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/07/inflated-federal-pay-how-americans-are-overtaxed-to-overpay-the-civil-service
But that won't happen because of unions who control government worker compensation and their ripping off the American people. The left will ignore the facts.
Building high speed rail is the dumbest idea ever. O claims it to be only $51 billion, but when has the government done anything for less than 3x the cost of the proposal? And it will never be self sufficient, just like Amtrak, just like all public transportation, just like all government. The left will ignore the facts.
Of course the rinos will go along. They are nearly as bad as the left.
We need smaller government in all sectors. The new budget is pure bs and only shows Obama and anyone who stands with his insanity want to bankrupt America. The Bush deficits don't come anywhere close to the crap this idiot is proposing.
In the corporate media they only present the Middle of the political spectrum, The Democrats/Obama (Which they designate as the "Left") and the Right: the Republicans.
But there is a REAL left and they have a criticism of Obama too that you never see on TV or hear on the radio.
Here it is, in this case courtesy of the World Socialist Website:
Obama's budget and the rot of American capitalism
15 February 2011
On Monday, the Obama administration released its proposed federal budget for fiscal year 2012. After committing trillions in federal bailouts to the banks and billionaires, the White House is demanding cuts that will devastate the working class, and particularly its poorest and most vulnerable sections.
The $1.1 trillion in cuts for the next decade proposed by the White House is to be only the starting point for further cuts, as spokesmen for both big business parties acknowledge. Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad, a Democrat, declared, "We've got to do substantially more than $1 trillion worth of deficit reduction in the next decade." Republican House Speaker John Boehner said, "There's no limit to the amount we're willing to cut."
Democrats and Republicans agree on gargantuan military spending, an uninterrupted flow of funds to the financial aristocracy, and continued tax breaks for corporate America and the wealthy. As a top White House official told the press at a background briefing on the budget, "The debate in Washington is not whether to cut or to spend. We both agree we should cut. The question is how we cut and what we cut."
The Obama budget projects that the ten-year cumulative deficit will reach a staggering $10.4 trillion. By attempting to wring such vast sums from the hides of the population, the ruling elite is trying to set American society back to conditions not seen for generations.
Programs to be cut include not only those targeted by Obama and the Republicans in the current budget debate—home heating assistance, Pell Grants, WIC, Head Start, etc.—but the much larger entitlement programs, Social Security and Medicare, which will face cuts later in the budget process.
The social impact will be incalculable. As hundreds of thousands of people face the bitter cold of winter without heat and gas, Obama is proposing halving the grossly inadequate federal assistance that is available. As students graduate with record debt and no job prospects, the administration is proposing significant cuts in government aid. Such gross indifference to social distress is repeated in every sphere.
Significant cuts to Social Security and Medicare—which amount to denying America's elderly their right to pensions and health care—would have an even broader impact....
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/feb2011/pers-f15.shtml
Here's a little scenario for those who carry Obama's water while blaming it all on Bush.
You're in an automobile accident. You're bleeding to death. You are rushed to the hospital. In walks the doctor. Now, it's not his fault that you were in the accident, but the hospital has put him there because they were told he could so what needed to be done to save lives. He takes one look at you and says, doing what is necessary to save this man's life will not be an easy task, but it's not really my fault he was in an accident and is now bleeding to death, so I'll just attach a few leaches to his body. See ya.
This is exactly what is going on. Obama was put in office to STOP the bleeding, not throw leaches on the wound!
Raising spending AGAIN and then making a few cuts is not a budget to live by. That's like saying my current spending is $5,000.00 a month, but I only bring in $3,000.00 a month, so I'm going to increase my spending to $7,000.00 a month this year, but I'll cut back to spending $6,000.00 a month next year. HELLO.....................
Another analogy for you is when your wife comes home from shopping. She's spent $500.00 but tells you that by spending the $500.00 she saved $100.00. Umm.......no you didn't SAVE anything. You spent $500.00.
Again.............HELLO.............anyone listening?
FlyNav,
I cannot agree or criticize the specific issues addressed in the budget until I read it but I feel the general tenor is correct. I disagree with the idea you and many others have that business or economies grow by draconian cost cutting in times of trouble what it usually puts them out of business. When a business is operating poorly because of obsolete equipment and proceedures the way to avoid closing is to invest in new equipment, technologies and staff trainining and education even if it means borrowing every dime you can get your hands on. If you are making fewer and fewer buggy whips you can keep cutting expenses until you lock the doors or you can take a risk retool and start making steering wheels. Trickle down is an economic buggy whip which has seen us go from the largest creditor in the world to the largest debtor, we have fallen to 19th as an educated populus and we have fallen off the edge of the earth as a manufacturer and exporter. These are adirect result of a low tax rate for the top couple of brackets. When our economy was the envy of the world the top bracket ranged between 72% and 92%. Low top brackets cost jobs, stifle long term investment and encourage risk taking, speculation and the creation of bubbles. If we cut investment in education, research, technologies and alternative energies no nothing new will be created and we will become an exporter of only agriculture and a failed post industrial state either broken up or reconstituted.
JKH
In response to Lynchmob's post
Where do you think the wealth came from? Have you heard about sweat shops, child labor, working employees six days a week and unsafe working conditions? In the early days of our history, all of these practices help to increase wealth for the owners and the workers in poverty; many with no hope of ever getting ahead. In today's society, Americans have a greater opportunity to succeed because of programs that offer training, grants and loans.
Lynchmob, it is a fallacy to assume that because an individual is poor that he or she does not work hard. It is an erroneous belief of the under informed that government programs afford "a nice life". The government give people enough to sustain them and keep them from being homeless, those programs do not raise anyone above the poverty level.
If the wealth is old wealth, in many cases, the inheritors can be unambitious and still remain wealthy; therefore, retaining wealth does not always depend on ambition.
The poor might not pay income taxes, but they definitely pay into the system. In most states, food, clothes, appliances, cars, and electronics are all taxed. Therefore, when an individual with "benefits" buy food, clothes or other items, he or she pays into the system just as the rest of us do. Lynchmob, if you took a few moments to think about the community outreach programs sponsored by neighborhood Churches and organizations, you will realize that most of the people giving are poor or struggling. Yes, many of the wealthy do give to charities ( it is a tax write off); however, the poor give also, mainly because they know just how hard it is to survive on so little.
Your statement concerning the rich not reaping any benefits, below I will cite just one benefit to the wealthy that has reduced our revenue; the estate tax.
The estate tax is levied when wealth is transferred at death. When people die, their assets are
typically distributed to relatives, other designated individuals, or charities. If people have
substantial wealth in their estate, an estate tax is paid before their wealth is passed on. This
means that it is not a person who pays estate tax, but the executors on behalf of an estate. The tax
is levied when an estate is settled, not at the time of death, as some opponents of the tax claim.
A surviving spouse can receive the entire estate of his or her deceased spouse, regardless of its
size, without paying any estate tax. Similarly, funds donated to charity are 100 percent
deductible and reduce the size of the estate, thereby reducing or eliminating the estate tax owed.
The trade associations of the wealthy families’ companies and Patricia Soldano, the lobbyist who
has represented at least seven of the families, played a central role in the formation of a massive
anti-estate tax alliance – the Family Business Estate Tax Coalition – that has served as the main
coordinator of the repeal campaign.
Members of the Business Coalition, which consists of about 45 organizations, have reported
combined lobbying expenditures approaching a half-billion dollars – $457 million – since 1998.
"In May 2001, Congress passed the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001
(EGTRRA), which included provisions to phase out and temporarily repeal the estate tax. This
law incrementally raised the amount of wealth exempted by the tax from $675,000 in 2001 to
$3.5 million in 2009. In 2010, the estate tax will be repealed for one year. But in 2011, the entire
tax law will sunset and the estate tax will revert to the pre-2001 law, but with a $1 million wealth
exemption."
Does this provision benefit the poor or wealthy?
read on
The strategists’ plan to shine a spotlight on small business owners was also illustrated in June
2005 during the “Death Tax Summit,” an annual event coordinated by Frank Blethen, the
patriarch of the family that retains a controlling interest in the Seattle Times Co.
Blethen insisted that the campaign must not appear to be orchestrated by ultra-wealthy white
millionaires. “We need to stress the harm to women and minorities,” Blethen told attendees of
the summit.
Carmarie:
Spoken like a true LIBERAL. I'll address your post via numerical points.
1) Unions took care of you first answer to my post. But Unions served their purpose long ago. All of the "worker" laws are now on the books. Unions have become useless and corrupt. All they do now is collect dues and misappropriate them. Plus, they are almost all tied into the mob. But, you're a LIBERAL so you're probably pro-Union.
2) I did not assume that poor people don't work hard.
3) The government shouldn't sustain anyone. A person should stand on their own two feet via personal responsibility.
4) Yes, inheritors can be unambitious and retain wealth. I didn't feel like filling up bandwidth by listing all the possible combinations of rich/poor, ambitious/unambitious and their various outcomes.
5) So you're saying that poor people who receive benefits from the government and then pay sales tax are paying into the system? Their benefits came from other people's taxes. they received money from the gov and then turned around and paid money back to the gov via sales tax. That's like saying that all the government employees (those in the public sector) pay into the system. They don't! Their salaries come from other people's taxes to begin with!!! I'll make it real easy for you: Give me a dollar. A month from now, I'll give you 7 cents. Woo-hoo! I paid sales tax!
6) The Estate Tax is another form of the gov taking money for no good reason. The wealth accumulated has already been taxed throughout the person's life. Now, that wealth is getting passed on and the gov takes a huge chunk out of it. Why? It was started so that certain families wouldn't get too rich. I mean rich beyond rich. Wealth accumulating from wealth and continuing on from generation to generation. Gov better step in and take a piece here and there to keep it under control.
TEA Party = Tax Evading Americans Party
It is actually Taxed Enough Already.....Doh!
Response to Obama's budget?
Extreme laughter.
You'd expect the media to be all over Obama for his "deficit reduction" plans. Where exactly is the reduction? Oh, 10 years from now . . . . Yeah, that will happen. Even the Liberal media will have a hard time spinning this foolish and idiotic budget proposal from Obama.
Obama commissioned a Debt Commission last year, they gave a solid report on on how the deficit and the debt should be dealt with. Obama has ignored his very own commission and decided to punt the problem to someone else. A major question when Obama was elected was his leadership skills and his ability to take on the tough issues. Now we see that Obama has no clue how to manage the economy and the governments bloated spending spree.
" Where exactly is the reduction?"
Fair enough. Where's Mr Speaker's?
Six responses quoted from Republican leaders vs two from the Democrats - oh that liberal media!
I guess if all you can do is point to Bowles-Simpson there must not be a Republican plan?
Republicans wanted control of the budget, when do they plan to do something about it?
lt.jdangle
"obama has doubled the deficit in 2 years."
That is what is called an un-truth, a fabrication, and an out and out lie. How do you manage to type without your nose geting in the way?
President Obama's the only leader that knows how to machette his way through the jungle created by the Bu@!$%#es. There is not one potential Republican candidate that has the intelligence, determination and fortitude to continue this country on the right direction.
We cannot let the rich Republicans destroy or blur this path we're on. We can see the light at the end of a long, long dark tunnel, thanks to President Obama and his administration.
Today was Obama's day to shine, and he failed miserably. Anyone expecting to get any kind of leadership from Obama, the making of the tough the choices, the addressing of the deficit reduction issue, the setting of a realistic path to deficit reduction, well, those people are disappointed today.
What sort of leadership is coming from the Republicans on this issue?
What's their plan to cut spending and balance the budget?
All of our FR Conservatives seem to be unaware of any such plan.
Republicans do run the House of Representatives after all, home to all budgetary bills.
Exactly right John B.
The new Republican House has been promising ideas since last November. Turns out they really don't have any and prefer to wait for the President to blink first so they can piggyback on what he does.
johnb - the leadership knows that only a bipartisan plan will work
The plan is coming along just fine
The FR conservatives can only express their desires not how the house republicans will create a bipartisanship plan that will pass thru the senate and avoid a presidential veto
Yes, the budget is the houses responsibility, not obamas. Obamas is just a wish list from which to get house support. Wonder if after reading Reagans biography, obama will be able to get the same level of support from boener and the republicans, as reagan got from o'neil and the democrats?
BTW- Where are the shovel ready jobs???
Fieldon - It is called politics
I thought Republicans knew what they were going to do before Election Day. That's what they promised the American people.
When will their plan be finished and ready to talk about?
I am SICK to death of people accusing President Obama of bringing this country down. NOTHING he or a Democratic Congress has done has created our current situation.
If you all want to continue this fantasy, go ahead. I am tired of reducating the masses here on Newsvine.
Sorry, John B.
President Obama's executive order created the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform.
You can call it "Bowles-Simpson" all you like...but we both know it's owned by it's creator: President Obama.
It's not going away, John...nor should it.
Valiant effort, John...but futile.
On the contrary, the "valiant effort" is the attempt to deflect responsibility away from the Republicans who now control the budget process.
Republican Conservatives promised that they had a plan to increase economic activity and provide a blanced budget.
What's the plan?
You can ask from now to eternity John and you will not get a answer. The "give it time" and "they are working on a plan" is the best the wingers can give as a response. Funny, they seem to be always "working on a plan".
Amy -
Obama and the democrat-controlled Congress DID double the deficit compared to Bush and the democrat-controlled Congress. Additionally, Bush and the democrat-controlled Congress tripled the deficits of Bush and the republican-controlled Congress of Bush's first 6 years in office - even when you consider Iraq and Afghanistan.
Please understand that the DEFICIT is the YEARLY amount that the budget is short while the DEBT is the CUMULATIVE amount that the budgets have fallen short.
I think you are confusing the two.
I have to laugh. Write an article about money and Obama in the same sentence, and every GOP/Tea Bagger comes withering out to spew.
Republicans remind me of a cartoon character that my granddaughter watches. They are like this crab that chases a penny around the town that rolls through his office.
And Bob Corker? How many of you even know anything about him? I do. He hires illegal aliens to work for him. You know......... The ones you guys are always complaining about taking American jobs. Some schister vomits up a plan and the schmucks lap it up.
Obama's budget advocates NEW RECORD deficits, national debt and spending
Steny Hoyer: "The president's budget makes the tough choices we need to reduce spending"
VOTE these lying criminals out yesterday if not sooner
Oh please. If you wanted to vote out criminals you wouldn't have worked so hard to re-elect the Bush administration. How much did we lose to fraud in Iraq?
Amyb - Get your azz in gear and push to extradite Iraqi's leaders to the US to face fraud and embezzlement charges. Don't forget to bring up charges for the governments of Haiti, Pakistan and Afganistan as well.
FR liberals - We need to dwell in the past
FR conservatives - we need to learn from the past and go forward!
"FR conservatives - we need to learn from the past and go forward!"
What a hoot! You never learn.
"FR Conservatives- we need to learn from the past and go forward" Translation, forget about what we have done in the past, we need you to believe we'll be different this time.
american -
I think that it's obvious that Shellie and Amy are way too stubborn to learn from the past. Perhaps this is why the keep spouting the same old tired propaganda.
Speaker Boehner, please explain how spending destroys jobs. The jobs are destroyed when there is too little spending by either the public or by government. With few exceptions, right and left economists agree that cutting spending too much, too quickly will result in a second recession. If the GOP was serious about the deficit and the debt, they would start by telling people the truth--we can't "cut spending" our way out of the mess THEY created, there is a need to raise taxes on millionaires and billionaires; and most of all, we need a complete overhaul of the tax code to eliminate the loopholes so that everyone can pay lower personal federal taxes. Yes, THE GOPTP is largely responsible for this mess, and any conservative who says otherwise is flat out in denial.
"please explain how spending destroys jobs"
Have you heard of Obamacare? or the numerous unemployment extensions? Both are costing a fortune for businesses thereby costing jobs.
Jody please back away from the Nancy Pelosi Democrats talking points.
Right on Jody. These TP/conservatives will choke when they see the unemplyment numbers with massive spending cuts. The private sector has spoken.....we don't need to hire the deadwood we got rid of during the last two years. They're making money and keeping production levels up without hiring more, so why should they? Should the conservatives cut the federal budget as much as they want, the unemployment will go up several more percentage points and a double-dip recession will occur. WTG Republicans, you got elected just in time to screw the Amercian public again, just like during the Bush administration....that is everyone except the rich folks.
pjam09,Your entire statement is incorrect.Small busineses are not going to be taxed anymore than all the rest of us for "Obamacare".And as far as the unemployment extensions they were all government funded so that also came out of the taxes we all pay not just small busineses.I for one would rather see my tax dollars go to help hard working americans than to to funding wars overseas started by the previous administartion or providing more tax breaks for the wealthy.
Jody - how is spending going to get us out of debt? How much longer are we going to allow the politicians to kick the proverbial can down the street?
Bill-300... - That's right, first the private sector deadwood goes then some muscle if necessary. We all know that government jobs are dependant on private sector taxpayers to pay their salaries.
It is time for the government sector deadwood to be cast aside and if need be a little bit of muscle as well. Responsible government does not mean big government.
Jody, you are correct - the right label everything, without exception, as "job killing", without offering any proof whatsoever that any jobs have been or will be lost as a result. There is not one single thing Obama and the Democrats could do that would not be labeled "job killing" - it comes out of the mouths of righties before anyone from the left even speaks! It's a flippin' JOKE! "It will kill jobs", "tax increases", "increased spending", then some babble about our chilcren's future, etc, etc. What a load! When the Repugs come up with a real PLAN that does more than strip everything away from the lower and middle class and continue handing the country over to the Ultra Rich businesspeople who continue to send JOBS off-shore, maybe more of us will be willing to listen.
My fellow Americans not to worry about the reduction of jobs by Obamacare. Republicans are here to save us anyway. They got their tax cuts extension to do that. Remember?...back in November they said that was going to generate lots and lots of jobs. Do they mention that any more???...hell no! The discussion also is about obama's overspending. Yes, he is overspending trying to fix the mess that republicans left when they were in power. Nine years ago the economy started sinking and we the american people lossing jobs and they didn't lift a finger to do something about it. Now they blame President Obama. Guess what? I just released one and that's Obama's fault too.
Since you're citing the CBO I take it you're willing to accept their conclusion that repealing the Affordable Care Act will increase the budget deficit, correct LOL?
In any case your statement above is a blatant misrepresentation of the CBO's position. From FactCheck.org;
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/01/a-job-killing-law/
In other words desperation for health coverage will not keep as many people in the labor market. Their lives will be better and their minds will be eased by not having to work years past the time when their health fails or multiple jobs just to keep their heads above water.
How is that a bad thing?
LOL, what is your source for the quote by CBO and in what context? I expect you are glued to Fox not-really-news-but-really-entertainment channel. I would "feel better" if the Republicans would start being reasonable instead of being obstructionist for no reason other than political points garnered from the ignorant. They will not accept the budget as is proposed and have a load of criticism, but when asked what do you propose, the answer from Rep. Ryan is essentially "I dunno". No plan yet, only criticism. It is irresponsible at best to be completely opposed without presenting alternatives - in ANY situation. If you went to your boss with a load of complaints but no solutions, how far do you think you would get? If one of your employees came to you with a batch of complaints and no solutions, would you listen?
Expect the Host here at FR to Post a Few more stories in rapid succession on First Read to bury this Story as they are not getting the Hate post they would expect..............
in..
Boy, I'LL say. Look at 'em all.....
First Read: When are we going to read about the Chamber of Commerce email-gate?
And this has what exactly to do with Obama's budget?
Gary:
You are not wrong, but it does not mean that you are right.
Is has everything to do with our well-being. What the media chooses to cover or not to cover.
Well imagine that the Repubs and the Dems have a completely different take on the budget. Who would of thunk it!
Once again politicians prove that if you give them three dollars they will justify spending six. They do not seem to have the capacity to do simple math.
It I am all for term limits. Strom Thruman and Robert Byrd where poster children for the need for term limits.
i guess the baggers and repubs dont remember those famous dick cheney words:
"deficits dont matter" do they. they dont remember regan having tax increases 7 of his 8 years in office.
bill-126... - ok so where are obamas tax increases?? Apperently obama and company has taken cheney's words to heart as their own. Now what??
Why is EVERYONE ignoring the fact that President Bush (43) HID the cost of two wars from the books??? His deficits, the SAME Republicans we see today, are responsibile for the bulk of the deficits in this country and they spent their way OUT OF OFFICE for those deeds.
Nite -
Wrong, as usual. The costs of Iraq and Afghanistan, while they did not show up on the budget - as no war has until Obama - they have always shown up on the debt. Not only this, but they were not 'hidden' as Congress had to pass appropriations bills for them.
Maybe you should try some facts (you know, those pesky things that you liberals like to ignore as they get in the way of your rhetoric) instead of propaganda.
Yes Tammy, they were always a part of the debt.
They were NEVER included in the deficit or debt PROJECTIONS produced by the Bush Administration.
I guess the facts must have a Liberal bias.
I will spend like crazy for two more years then cut the deficit by 1.1 trillion after that. The President now does his John Lovitz imitation, how appropriate.
WHAT EXACTLY do you think President Obama spent and for what purpose????
How about this President is honest about what he is spending, UNLIKE the Republican's who preceded him.
Nite -
If he's so 'honest', then where did all of the money from the stimulus go?
I know you believe he can do no wrong, but his 'agenda' is bankrupting this country.
Tammy,
Go to: http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/default.aspx
See the “Overview of Funding” graph.
You simply can't keep taking from the middle and lower classes to support the greed of the wealthy, who cannot and will not help create jobs here. Not profitable, you know. Us poor people have run out of cash, food, heat, medical care, prescription drugs, and bodies to sacfifice for your unpaid for, murderous wars. We need JOBS not phony promises, and endless theft of what little we have left. This is my country too, so you cant' take it "back", back to the 1800's, that will destroy any "execptionalism" we might have once had.
Start your own business and then you can hire as many people as you want. Why do you depend on anyone else to take are of you?
why do they let people like you Bookem' have keyboards?
Probably because I can afford to buy one on my own. I don't need to use the free one at the public library.
OK, here is a little less brief of a point to Michelle. If you want something such as those in business have, take the risk to reap the reward. If you are unwilling to take the risk to become prosperous, don't complain because someone they are not willing to give up what they have so you can have more.
Michelle & dumas.. - Bookem has a point, America was founded on exceptionalism as there where far more people who had their own business compared to those who worked for them. The industrial age saw the innovators hire those that were willing to work for what was offered in wages giving rise to the middle class. The unions ensured that the middle class wages and benefits rose along with the growth of industry. The unions and government screwed the pooch as they saw the middle class as a means to gain wealth and redistribute the wealth of the rich and middle class.
Seems that the middle class has done exceptionally well in demanding low cost consumer products. Products I might add require foreign workers to build them at the price the middle class and the poor wants them to be at!
Bookem doesn't have a point. bookem is another delusional wingnut that believes he has done everything on his own and that business has too. bookem conveniently chooses to forget about the tax breaks, subsidies and mound of other things that allow business to be more profitable compliments of the federal government and TAXPAYER. bookem conviently chooses to forget labor laws (AGAIN, thanks to the Feds) that HELPED him, yes I said HELPED him succeed and not have to work in a sweatshop. Apparently bookem also has no knowledge of this countries history. May I suggest bookem lean a little then enjoy a nice big slice of humble pie.
Shellie -
Keep drinking that kool-aid. When the democrats lose even more seats in Congress and Obama loses the presidency, maybe then you will learn that rhetoric does not run a country - except into the ground.
This may be too late, but wow, Shellie. Your assumptions about me are tremendiously ingnorant.
I would implore you to read history yourself...not Alinsky but rather writings of the founders. I would also like you to read more about how FDR essentially bullied the Supreme Court into allowing the federal government to do things that were for well over 100 years thought unconstitutional.
Until someone tackles Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Defense spending, everything is meaningless. There are two solutions, but neither party wants to address them. Raise revenue or make changes/cuts in these areas.
It is an unpopular choice for all sides; however, we need to raise taxes. It is time we (AMERICANS)all tighten our belts, be responsible, and pay more taxes. This country experienced some of its most prosperous years, when federal taxes were the highest; therefore, the argument that lower taxes will spur job growth is a myth.
Making minor cuts and/or reorganizing social programs to run efficiently is necessary; however, helping those that are less fortunate, is one of the reasons we have stability in this country. If most social programs were severely cut or eliminated, we would see an raise in crime, deaths, health related issues, and eventually uprisings such as those in the Middle East.
If we believe in our country, if we believe that this is one of the greatest countries in the world, if we want to decrease our national debt, then be patriotic and put your money were your mouth is. It is time that Congress repealed the extension of President Bush's tax cuts, simplify the tax code and increase taxes for all Americans with incomes 1% above the poverty level.
The United States of America will not be able to compete in the new global economy if, we do not Educate, Innovate and Update. Therefore, we have to spend money on education, research and development,renewable energy, and repair, replace, and upgrade our infrastructure.
Leave it to a community organizer lawyer to run shiit through a strainer and expect everyone to believe it's gumbo that smells unique.
Spanky-
Could you just imagine if Obama were the CFO of a private company? [I know a bridge too far, but..}
Great comment from a righty that supports an organization ( Republican National Committee ) that admits that it is $21,000,000.00 in the hole.
And you idiots want to run (ruin) the country . Again?
I know there were reports of the democrats going 'into the hole' as well during this last election cycle. Have they actually paid off their debt yet? or are you conveniently 'forgetting' that little piece of information?
www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/45898.html
Lots of Blah, Blah, Blah but no specifics from the Republicans. So sick of politicians and their bull sh*(07!
Jody: You have no justification to back away from the truth. Attagirl - keep it up! ! ! !
National Enquirer Claims John Boehner Had Affairs
POSTED BY VINCE GRZEGOREK ON WED, FEB 9, 2011 AT 11:16 AM
Everyone's favorite crying orange could be in a spot of trouble early in his tenure as Speaker of the House. The National Enquirer claims that Boehner had some sexytime affairs with two women, additionally reporting that the New York Times has an ongoing probe on the alleged sex scandal as well.
Yes, it's the Enquirer, but it's also the paper that broke the John Edwards mistress and baby story, so who knows.
Here's a snippet from their online report (the full article is only available in their print edition):
And once the Enquirer had a headline: Physic dog got me pregnant! Believe that also?
Who cares? Keep dreaming...
Draming -
What's the matter? Jealous?
Is he a man? He probably did have an affair, but as long as it did not interfere with him doing his job, who cares. It is a private matter between him and his family.
Of course, everything from Obama is wrong. Spend--wrong. Cut--wrong.
Now what do all you rocket scientists propose?
No matter what he does, you won't like it. But you got no answers.
Got racism?
Racism? I know it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you like to play the race card. Really racism???? Now that's funny...........
You're are about as correct in your statement as your record is good against the SEC in the last 10 bowl games. One and nine I think!!
Standard lefty procedure. Twist the facts, If that is not workable then switch to personel attacks. When that fails move onto the race card. Just like Obama same old crap. Spend yourself into a corner and cry wolf. Point at Bush, do anything but accept the fact that the issue is on your desk and you have done nothing to solve it...... Except offer more tax and spend Ideas that have failed so miserably......
2012 Pawlenty is a much better choice......
Spanky,
The only American Automotive manufacturer not requiring a bailout leveraged themselves to the hilt. That got them through the tough times. I don't think they fired their CFO. btw, it was Ford. You learned something today! Rejoice my friend!
If you think that GM wouldn't take Ford down with them, then you don't know how "circle of life works", everything is connected.
I see both sides have lines up in their respective camps. how predictable. Ok We have three sides of this triangle, the President goes one way, I have seen nothing from the House that tells me they are going to do anything, and the Senate is deliberating some more on it's navel. are we floating down stream or sinking in a bubble??
Oh my God, reading all of those comments from Republicans, even I believe that Obama proposed "Apocalypses and the road how to get there" or soon to be "Zombie land II ". What a bunch of big mouth tweet's, I can imagine what Fox showing, probably the "Obama attack on America is around the corner", unless Republican rule then its just a "necessity of life".
Emma, don't get too close to the edge, it's a long fall! Come back!
how do you know they're Republican? Did they say they are or you just assume because they don't like Obama's budget or you can be like OSU Linebackers and throw out the race card. Either way, both remarks are not warrented.
Paul-Florida your remarks were disingenuous and not warranted, geez
The Democrats are saying "it would reduce our deficit by $1.1 trillion over the next decade" Yeah Sure! This administration and the Democratic Party couldn't plan a budget for the last 2 years, yet alone a decade!
After being unthawed Dr. Evil said " I will demand 1 Million Dollars".........has this president and his administration been frozen in time for the past 2 years?
They may know the law, but they sure can't add and subtract......and that's a fact!
But then again, that's the way they want you to see them as.....while they pick your pockets clean!
I love how cutting tax breaks for the top 2% is a tax hike. Only in GOP derp-land.
I love how not increasing the budget as previously projected is a spending cut. Only in .......blah, blah.
What's the point in having poor people if we're just going to give them everything?
Has everyone gone "Cracker" over BHO?.............not me!
BOTTOM LINE: Want to reduce the deficit WITHOUT raising taxes? Create jobs! Job = income for the government! And part of the deficit issue is that without jobs our government income has dropped! Jobs creation is the first step to deficit reduction!
But that was the Repubs manifesto - and their first priority when they took over was going to be job creation.....and so far what have we seen about job creation......and waiting..........and waiting........and waiting.........oh I know - they have only been in for 6 weeks now....and not enough time to think (but it took 8 years of bungling and they want to turn the Titanic around on a dime)....but give them another year or 2 and they will have a plan.....just like Richard Nixon's plan......
THERE AIN'T NO PLAN!
LOL, Hypocrites are a dime a dozen on this blog. "and Waiting" LOL. Jobs have been promised for 3 years by Obama, and guess what, Nothing. UE under 8% guaranteed, just let me pay off my buddies first. LOL
We are in a depression, it will not be easy to get out of.
Corp tax rates, just like personal tax rates need to have minimum levels where no loopholes will apply. IE. Personal tax rate at 15% which can be lowered to 10% if you contributed to Local non profits etc.
Same thing for Corp tax rates 20%, that can be lowered to 10% through job creation or green energy development etc. The %'s I used, are for example purposes only.
If every one paid their fair share we would destroy this deficit in no time. With the smaller loopholes for corp America their influence in Washington would be diminished as well.
I believe we badly need a truth in taxation policy implemented. Wow could you imagine that, we would actually know the who/what/where/why and when of our tax dollars. No more bait and switches, no more borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, no more smoke and mirrors taxation policies.
Just some thoughts from an independent mind. Go Tim Pawlenty in 2012