Wouldn't help to call Newt...he know believes Republicans won that round and is an advocate of another shut down.

I say bring it on.

John B:

I totally agree. Newt is a hero...only in his own mind.

When those Social Security checks stop coming to seniors, you bet they will think twice about being a GOP/TPer.

Did Obama punt to suck the Repubs into the Clinton trap?

Hope he did - This isn't 1995 and he doesn't have the credibility of Clinton.

Won't work, Repubs will win this time, and Boehner knows it.

BTW - You don't know that SS checks automatically still go out?

Teapublicans are all HUFF and NO PUFF!

They threaten to filibuster - they threaten a government shut down...

Isn't it time they 'Man Up' and make good on their threats?

bob: (numbers)

Sorry but there is no such thing as a painless government shutdown. SS checks do not automatically go out (either electronically into one's bank or by paper. That's why it's called a shut down.

Good Afternoon Ron Indiana

The reality as I see it is that Boehner can not control the TP, or his moderate republicans. He'll wait to see which way the wind is blowing and go in that direction.

Yes Ron he will look for his answer blowing in the wind. I've often thought this man is more beholden to " K"Street, Wall Street, the health care industry, and all multi national corporations who contribute to him.

I repeat...

We have a leader in our President who gets it from both sides and in the middle. But, he will go through the fire and even to the wall to make a decision for all of the people in America.

John Bohenor cannot lead. He is a a high-stakes chicken.

Also, I'd like to add no matter who would have won in 2008, after the mess GW Bush left it is a difficult task. Since the republican Party has been co-opted by the Chamber of Commerce, it's better a Democrat; namely President Obama.

Good afternoon Bev:

You have been writing some excellent posts and I enjoy each and every one.

Bev - wake up and smell the roses. Obama is a tax and spend liberal. We cannot spend what we do not have.
In your own life do you just buy whatever you think you have to have without thinking about how you are going to pay for it? Obama has run up a tremendous debt that someone is going to have to repay. Maybe you don't care but most of us do.
And I might add the spending has produced poor results to date. I suppose in 2012 Obama will still blame Bush and the mean Republicans for any spending cuts?

Ron Indiana

Why thank you Ron.

I think I'm right in my assessment of how difficult it is to lead for any sincere political party that wants to take this country out of the economic abyss and and unfavorable perception the world after has of US George Bush.

How about all the service providers under Medicare who won't get paid? The postal workers? What about processing people's tax refunds? A lot is at risk from a shutdown.

Gosh darn it Ron. You usually keep score around here, but I haven't seen you do that lately. Is it because it's getting so bad for you all? Just look at the substance of Fiesty's comments on this thread. Weak and conclusionary are not even adequate to descibe the poor old dear.

What are your thoughts on Navy "I'm being stalked by Cyberbullies." That was pretty darned weak, right?

Man the tides sure have shifted around here. Darn near no fun anymore.

Hey Ron,

In the context of the 1995 shutdown, they went out, mail was delivered, Medicare continued and vital workers in public health and safety, etc. continued.

(You think Obama's secret service guys are going home to wash the dog and hang around the house?)

According to CNN, the Agencies affected were Interior; Justice; Commerce; Veterans; HUD; Education; HHS; NASA; EPA; Labor; State.

Anyway, you didn't address the point about Obama losing big time on this.

Do you really think that if the Republicans say here is what we can afford, social security is covered - and Obama says no "I want my train set too and if I don't get it the old people don't get their money, either."

Really Ron?

Think Obama wins that one?

Spanky:

No need to keep score when you know you are winning...and us libs are winning.

and us libs are winning.

That we are my friend, that we are!

The fact that they grow nastier and more rabid with each passing day speakes volumes! ;o)

Spanky is also a legend in his own mind.

Spanky: Man the tides sure have shifted around here. Darn near no fun anymore.

And yet you are still trolling...

Hey bobby - you were saying?

Kelly’s assertions are simply not true. One need look no further than the federal government shutdown of 1995 for proof. During the nearly four-week shutdown, Social Security checks were not mailed and Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements were disrupted. According to a Center for American Progress report entitled “The Big Freeze,” the shutdown ultimately “cost the American taxpayer over $800 million and rattled the confidence of international investors in U.S. government bonds.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/16/kelly-govt-shutdown/

So Fiesty, Beverly, Ron and all you other lefties who are predicting teh downfall once again...

Why is it you cannot put the blame where it truly belongs..

The Dems did NOTHING to even start to propose a budget before October 1st when it was supposed to go INTO effect.

Congress controls the purse strings of this country and sets the budgets. THEY FAILED to do their number 1 job. Who was in control of both houses of Congress last year.. HELLO the very same people you are saying can do no wrong.

Do you really have your political blinders on that tight that you cannot see this lies 100 percent at the feet of Harry R. and Nancy P. ? If they would of done their job, the Gvmnt would of been funded, and we wouldnt be talking about a Gvmnt shut down.

When Gma and Gpa dont get their SS all the Republicans have to do, and be 100 percent correct is lay the blame where it belongs. Harry R and Nancy P for not bring the budget to the floor.

Dear RN: and I hope to God that doesn't mean you are taking care of sick people. Please turn off Fox "news". It rots brain cells,and we can quickly tell here when that is a sole source of news for a poster.

No, Jeremy, the current debacle in this country stems from the Cheney/Bush administration. Sorry.

Foogle it Geisty,

Yea I saw the thinkformeprogressivepropandatalkingpointstomarginalizetheotherguysargumentsite and checked out the blog's talking point, then saw CNN.

CNN or a liberal blog?

You pick yours - sane people pick theirs.

Ouch bobby... that one HAD to hurt! ;o)

newdayDAWNING10

No, Jeremy, the current debacle in this country stems from the Cheney/Bush administration. Sorry.

So are you really trying to say, with a straight face, that an administration who hasnt been in office for two years was responsible for congress NOT doing their job and passing a budget before it was supposed to be in effect?

Really ?

The Dem legislature n Wisconsin have left the building and are in hiding to prevent a vote. Now who is shutting down the government? Where is your indignation now? Their behaving like children and sniveling, little cowards. Is this the democracy our men and women in the military are fighting for?

Yes, Jeremy and only the truly blind do not understand that when the Cheney/Bush Administration had 8 years to go on a blind drunk spending binge, including keeping two wars off budget, it is going to take more than two years to repair it. I realize the challenged like to pretend that administration did not exist, but trust me, they did. And trust me, they did real damage.

Well Paul, since Conservative Republicans in Wisconsin are attempting to overturn worker rights that have been widely recognized for nearly 100 years...

Yes, this is EXACTLY the democracy our men and women in the military are fighting for.

It's the Republicans who are once again attacking the rights of ordinary citizens.

Just the state senate, Paul, but pretty good trick, isn't it? The republicans tried it here once, too. But unlike Texas, where Tom Delay -- that paragon and icon of democracy, who is about to go to jail for his role in that whole process -- had the gestapo call them back, it just might work this time. After all, the neighboring states both have very progressive, democratic governors. They could hide out a while. But I suspect that if Walker proposed a REAL solution, or at least agreed to talk it over, they'd be happy to come back.

By the way, apparently at least two republican state senators have also disappeared. What's the deal with that? Sniveling little cowards on both sides of the aisle, I guess.

newdayDAWNING10

WOw you just proved how much of a partisan hack and truly uninformed you really are..

We are * at least the people paying attention * are talking about a Gvmnt shutdown, due to the fact that the Federal Gvmnt is NOT running on a budget right now.

WHY has a budget not been approved.. THAT would be Nancy P and Harry R, the two leaders of each house last year. IT IS their job to pass a budget, which they failed to do..

SO Exactly how, in your leftist mindset, does Bush and Cheney have ANY PART in passing a budget for this fiscal year?

I will agree with you on one thing though.. Bush did go on a spending spree that we couldnt afford. I railed on Bush and his spending just like I rail on Obama when he has spent MORE than Bush..

SO please.... Tell me exactly how this was anyones fault Except the leaders of Congress for not passing a budget BEFORE October 1st.

Winning? Ron, seriously check out what's happening. It's all budget all the time. I'm fairly sure that is not really in your liberal best interest.

Or you just doing your Bagdad Bob impression? If you are - great job!

Hey Ron where'd the democratic senators in Wisconsin go? Kind of pulled a Navy routine from this morning (good to see you ignored that part of my post, I'd probably done the same in your shoes) and employed a new strategy: RUN AWAY.

Yep, guess you all are "winning."

when have republicans ever been for the rights of workers ..if they had it there way you wouldnt even have a minimum wage in this country

Jeremy: I wouldn't use the term partisan hack after what you just wrote. Do you remember the obstructionist Republicans, the only word they knew was "NO".

I still say if Conservatives think this is such a winning issue try it and find out.

For Conservative Republicans continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results is brilliant!

Ok NewDay I'll keep it real simple - why is there not a budget for this year? Were Nancy and Harry not in charge? Does the fact that there is no budget have anything to do with Bush?

Come on NewDay, show us what you got.

And John, how many other states are about to do the exact same thing?

It really is not a good time to be in, or relying on, a union.

I received my SS and VA check during the shutdown, so quit lying.

Another collector of our tax money sitting at home getting fat and talking smack about working folks, getting a ss and vet check, all he worries about is his check going to arrive , well i hope this tiem it does not

newdayDAWNING10

So why dont you ANSWER teh question. instead of trying to deflect it on a 100 percent irrevalent area..

I knew that there wouldnt be a SINGLE one of you lefties actually answer the question. You didnt disappoint.

The problem with you, is you cannot look past your part. I freely admit that I vote for as many Republicans as I do Democrats. I freely admit that there was a lot about Bush that I hated. Not one of you can put the blame where it belongs here..

Politics aside... it is Congress' job to pass a budget.. The Democratic controlled Congress did not even propose a 2011 fiscal year budget, let alone pass one. Exactly how is this the fault of anyone BESIDES the two people in charge of Congress...

Take off your blinders and stop being a partisan hack... Put the blame where it belongs.

Mike--I started working in 1946, paid taxes my entire life, served in Korea and S. Vietnam. Shot twice and partially disabled from the injuries. I retired in 1994 and enjoying life. Hopefully you'll grow to be a man and quit crying.

To those of you who call for reduction of social security and medicare, it appears as tho you haven't looked at your pay check in years. Those programs are run by the government (as tho the are like a savings account) thru deductions on your pay check. The money paid in by you over your lifetime is supposed to be used for you when you retire. Those who receive that money paid into the program and fully expect to receive what is theirs. The problem is that the Fed has been running these programs like a ponce scheme, the life expectancy was 63 when the started the program. That is why they set the retirement age at 65. They expected to only pay a few who lived long enough, but with people living into their 80s, they now say it costs to much. If you don't get how government works from this then you must be dumber that dirt.

Typical Progressive attitude: blame it on the Republicans, blame it on the Conservatives, blame it on anyone, it will hurt our seniors, it will hurt our children, it will hurt education, they are the party of No......guess Mrs. Pelosi's rhetoric has made some very nice people into monsters.

1. Where is Mr. Obama's budget for last Year ?
2. Why is it getting down to the wire requiring a continuing resolution ?
3. Why do the Progressives want to increase our debt limit ?
4. Why is Mr. Obama in San Francisco talking to the Facebook CEO (private meeting might I add) when more important things require him to stay home and be a leader ?

I will leave these questions to Erico, Festyvius, and the blond who did a hair change as soon as they get back from the Wisconsin protest and the planning committee meeting for the Day of Rage in Chicago.

Ron Indiana,

If this is what you call winning I'm glad were not on the same team!

.please answer these simple questions:

1. In the past 50 years, when did a Republican Congress introduce a balanced budget?

2. In the last 50 years, what Republican President introduced a balanced budget?

3. In his last year of Office was Bush's budget under $3.1 million?

4. In any year that Bush introduced a budget, did he include the cost of two wars?

5. Name the amount and cuts in the current Republican budget?

6. State why the Republicans have added $9 trillion to the debt in the past 13 yrs.?

7. Name the last year that Republicans did not add any pork barrel spending to any budgets?

The reason the Dems have no budget and are acting like cry babies is pretty serious. Everyone knows the Progressives would love to collapse our economy from the inside out. Then everyone is dependent on the government. I'm an Independent and after the fiasco of Obama I will never vote for another Dem again. Bring on Chris Christy and Rubio.

Sadly enough the libs are like Nero they're still fiddling and Rome is about to burn to the ground. They don't understand the Golden Goose is out of eggs and they're still trying to rob the nest. Where is the 2010 Federal budget? Where is Nancy when we(they) need her leadership? Why is the Government not required to live within it's means? Why won't the libs realize the game is over there is no more money?

The elder Bush lost me when he said "Read my lips" but I am a robust GWB Republican.

I'm a liberal . . . actually independent but everyone seems to call me liberal, so whatever . . . and I will admit that the Democrat congress dropped the ball on this one. They should have come up with a budget, although anything they put together would have been shot down by the Republicans for the sole reason that it was created by Democrats. But even though everyone knows the Republicans would have just yelled "NO", they should have still created one.

At the same time, I think the Dems in WI pulled a b!t@h move by running away. But I also don't like what unions have turned into. They did some good things in the past, but there is not much need for them now. ALL workers should be equal, there is no reason a public worker should get benefits over private workers. This may stem from the fact that pension plans will create a bubble in my state, but there is not much we can do. At least I'm honest enough to admit my views reflect my personal situation.

All that said, I still will NOT support Republicans, or that retarded Tea Party, for one simple reason . . . they are the biggest hypocrites and liars I have ever seen.

Jeremy, the answer to your question, is this: the budget didn't get passed in the last session, because the Dems couldn't get it past the Republican filibuster in the Senate, so it would have died along with about 300 other bills, on the Senate floor. Any other questions?

This is ridiculous. We are broke, flat broke. We have been living above our means for decades, all to the detriment of our kids, grandkids, and those yet to be born. We have almost no leadership in DC, no budget, and most liberals if this site is any indication want to keep on spending as if none of this is real.

Fine, Bush spent too much. Clinton spent too much. Bush 41 spent too much. Reagan spent too much. Is this what you need to hear before you are willing to make cuts in federal spending so we can quit borrowing so much? What do you liberals want? Honestly, what is it you think will work? Even if Obama had his way and the top whatever income earners got their taxes increased it would have reduced our yearly deficits by at most 5%. And this assumes those wealthy affected people did nothing to alter their behavior.

It is no defense for democrats to say we should continue to act unwisely because republicans in the past have acted unwisely too. What are you, imbeciles? Who operates their personal life in this way? And what nation can remain strong with such an idiotic ethos powering it forward? How about some solutions instead?

End several federal departments. Not all at once, but over time so that we don't shock our system more than we must. Education is a good place to start. Commerce too. You in your states are bright enough to know how to educate the kids in your state. And do we really need corporate welfare? Isn't crony capitalism a major reason we are in the fix we are? End Energy too. Since created we are more dependent upon foreign sources of energy, not less. This is what those of us in the private sector would call FAILURE.

In the end this is not all about spending though. There are legitimate governmental duties that need funding. You can find those duties in Article One of the constitution. So limiting ourselves to those duties is a major step forward, but it isn't the solution entirely. We need a saner tax system, one which doesn't punish productivity, or reward sloth. And we need one which ends the charade we've been living for decades now. No company has ever paid a penny to the government in taxes that it didn't first collect from you, the consumer. So quit this game and tax ourselves directly. This alone will motivate many voters to vote more wisely, at least once they know their actual tax burden.

But, whatever we do, can we stop being so infantile as to argue that a government shut down will be good for democrats? I want to be in the same boat as you liberals regarding the success of my country, and when you reduce this to nothing more that who will gain a few popularity points, rather than comprehend we are in serious trouble in the USA, it becomes apparent to me that we do not want the same thing for our country. So tell me what you'd do to fix the mess we are in. Quit blaming one side only and take on the mantle of maturity you are so sorely lacking.

Rich,

I agree with many of the points you make, and I don't believe that democrats want to continue to spend unwisely. I'm a moderate, although my guess is that you would consider me a liberal, I've always been a conservative spender and keep my budget with a large safety net, having said all that, I think that Republicans and Democrats differ on what they consider unwise spending.

Hi Brent. Your response to Jeremy is flawless, or would be, if your claim were true. And this is my point in the above post too--quit trying to blame only one side. Jeremy is right, the dem controlled Congress didn't pass a budget. They didn't even propose a budget. But it had nothing to do with a senate filibuster. For two reasons. First, it would have to be presented in the Senate to be flibustered, and it never was. And second, the real reason is that budget resolutions, according to Senate rules, are not subject to the super majority requirement to end debate. That is, there is no 60 vote threshold needed to end debate and move to passage.

But don't believe me, please. Go look it up yourself. But in the meantime could you please stop being a partisan hack? You are no help to solving the real problems we face when you respond to serious questions about budgetary cowardice by defending "your side" with a lie.

Rich

What do you liberals want?

I will tell you what I want . . . I want the GOP and TP to stop limiting their "cuts" to only the programs they don't like. You want to cut, then CUT IT ALL.

They say some agencies are unnecessary, but they ignore the FCC. Why? Don't you support "less government"? Don't you support "personal responsibility"? Nooooooooo . . . you want MORE GOVERNMENT telling us what we can see and hear on TV. You want LESS RESPONSIBILITY for what your children watch on TV. Do we need the government to make sure we don't hear a bad word or see a boob on TV? NO, people should be "personally responsible" for what they watch, and what their kids watch. You don't like it, use your God-given thumb and change the F***ING channel. Embrace free speech on the airways. But NOOOOOOO . . . the GOP won't have anything to do with that. They all yell and scream about their children hearing a bad word. God forbid they actually be responsible for the children they crap out. So much for less government and personal responsibility.

And don't even get me started on the issue of "less government" and "personal responsibility" in regards to legalization. Do you have any idea how much money we waste on a failed drug war? Do you realize what we could save, and MAKE, with legalization. But here comes the GOP refusing to take "personal responsibility" for what they put in their body. Noooooooo . . . we need the government to protect people from themselves. How about we make people responsible for their decisions, and if they destroy their own life, it's all on them? Again . . . less government, more personal responsibility. You are on board with that, right?

I want the GOP to stop being hypocrites . . . CUT IT ALL, not just the programs you don't like.

Hi Rescue, I'm sure you are right--republicans and democrats DO differ on what they think is unwise. My post wasn't about how we are different, but more about how we have, or should have, a common goal. Yet when I read the vast majority of the posts on this issue from my liberal friends I find time and again two fundamental points being made. The first is that republicans will hand to democrats a massive electoral advantage by trying to cut the budget. The second is that there is no need to cut anything (save perhaps the military), because republicans are not as pure as the wind driven snow themselves.

If I am right about these two points then how can I ever find common ground on any unwise spending with liberals? What will occur will come at us because the laws of economics will drive our options, not DC leadership. The left railed against Bush's 3% of GDP deficits, yet defend Obama's 10% plus of GDP deficits. How about BOTH were unwise? So either leftists were sincere about Bush, and are insincere about Obama, or not. If not, then lets get to cutting. I put forward some of my broad-brush cutting ideas. Will you return the favor and give me some of yours? You might be surprised and find me more of an ally than you imagine.

Cali, could you do me a favor and begin by not telling me what I obviously do support, or I obviously do oppose? I think most conservatives are willing to discuss just about any cuts you want to bring up. I would end the FCC. I have no problem with that. I would end the Corporation for Public Broadcasting too. The point is I can give you a long list of things I am willing to cut. Including Medicare and SS. How to do these things is delicate, but they must be done. So quit hammering at people for being hypocrites when you merely disagree with them.

And put up the cuts you are willing to accept. Cut the war on drugs entirely? You bet. But I would go further and eliminate all federal grants to states and municipalities for non-federal duties, like policing. Can't the people where you live figure out how to finance your own police department? Or fire department? I bet you can. I know the people where I live can.

I can tell you this...if you are sincere about wanting a more libertarian kind of federal government, as you imply with your post, you will find no greater ally than me. However, if that is your sincere goal, then this makes you as much a Tea Partier as me. Sorry to break the news to you since you seem to despise them. Anyhow, I am willing to test just how far you are really willing to go in cutting the federal government. Because even if it's only 1/10th what I would do it's a start, which is better than I see from virtually any poster from the left.

Okay, then, here's a solution. The Repubs wanted to cut the deficit by $100 billion. This can easily be done, by cutting that amount off of the defense budget. We spend about $700 billion/year on defense (China is the number 2 spender in the world on defense, but they only spend $29 billion/year, go figure), and Robert gates said the other day that they only need $540 billion/year to function properly. Do you see the numbers yet? And I haven't even touched on medicare and medicaid, yet. The Repubs can live up to their promise, but they have to cut one of their most sacred cows to do it. There is way too much fraud in the medicare and medicaid brackets, and the doctors themselves have said they recommend tests that patients don't need, just to be defensive and cover their own butts, instead of really doing what only needs to be done for the patient. Does anyone here like succumbing to tests that they really don't need? The doctors are so afraid of being sued, that they order tests, that aren't actually needed. That is pathetic. I live in Texas and we have tort reform here, but the only people that have benefitted from it have been the doctors. We were told that our insurance rates would also go down, but that never happened. Apparently, doctors need to be regulated, or we have to come up with some form of system that will keep them honest, and doesn't allow people to sue the doctor for outrageous amounts of money. There has to be some sort of cut off point for it, otherwise the doctor pretty much goes to the poorhouse, or they just get outrageous malpractice insurance. Maybe there should be a court that has doctors as on a judicial panel, that can dole out penalties and such in malpractice cases. If we end up raising the debt ceiling, a international banking commision (I don't remember which one.) has told us that they will downgrade the US Gov't.s credit rating. Something has got to give here. Then we could not only get rid of the war on drugs, but leagalize marijuana and tax it like we do alcohol and/or cigarettes. It is the number one cash crop in the world and has been since the 80's. Maybe this will help Rich with his discussion.

Medicare and SS should not be a part of the budget or a part of any discussions about cutting the budget. Both are funded by contributions forcibly taken from all wage earners and belong to those wage earners. I do not dispute there are potential problems with the future of both but these are separate issues to the budget. In fact if SS had been handled responsibly it would be awash in money and the surplus could partially or totally fund any shortfall in medicare. How do I know this you ask? I have done rough calculations on what I have paid in over my working lifetime and if it were paid out to me in a lump sum with interest (at the prevailing rates each month of my working life) compounded over said working lifetime I would have enough for me and my wife to live very comfortably on for our expected lifetimes (based on family history over 90 years) and still have money left to leave our children. If you returned her forced contributions calculated the same way we would be quite wealthy.

Hey Brent, if the SecDef wants to go to 540bn a year then lets do it. I think he means absent the Iraq and Afghanistan obligations, but I am willing to go there. China doesn't spent only 29bn, but lets also leave these facts out of it. The point is you are willing to cut all 100bn, but only from defense. Okay, this gets us about 7% of the way to balance. Your idea about legalization and taxation might make perfect sense at the state level, but as one concerned about federal encroachment into state issues I would oppose this at the federal level. Unless you think you can get an amendment to the constitution passed by the states.

Regardless of that outcome, however, the amount of taxation that could be derived from legalizing marijuana, and then taxing it, would probably not amount to much more than 10bn a year, if even that. A lot of money, I agree, but not enough to forestall a credit rating shock to us. No, we need to go after the money where it is, kind of like Willie Sutton explained when asked why he robbed banks. And the money is in SS, Medicare, and Medicaid, which you rightly explain are riddled with waste and fraud.

The problem with all of your proposed "fixes" is that it fixes nothing. Doctors and patients adjust in order to work within, whether legal or not, the system we will provide. Having doctors mete out punishments, for instance, is like putting the foxes in charge of, well, the foxes. Maybe we can create a system which incentivizes efficient and economical behavior, rather than the opposite?

First, end it as a federal matter. Over time, not all at once, and start with newer Americans--the older Americans are less inclined to accept a radical change. Second, if you are going to assist the poor, say with Medicaid, give them the help in the form of a voucher enough to fund their own insurance, but in no case more than the market in that region requires. Third, make any savings in the voucher partly distributable to the poor person holding it. This means that if you give John Smith a $500/month voucher for insurance, but he is able to purchase an acceptable policy for $400/month, then give to John Smith some portion of the $100 savings. You both get him insured, which you liberals think is nirvana, and you get him operating in a way that can help make the program cost less. Just do it all at the state level.

Anyhow, thanks for the start. By the way, one way to cut more money from defense is to bring our troops home from Europe. There are many hegemonical reasons to be in Asia, Africa, and South America, but I think most of us can agree that defending Europe from an emasculated Russia, particularly since so many Europeans are ingrates over this, isn't a necessity.

Hey Mac, you make a very good point about SS. We would all be wealthier if it had never been created. You make just one error imo and that is in saying the trust fund was irresponsibly managed. I think it was managed exactly as was intended--to enlarge federal spending and grow the federal government. It isn't that the trust fund was wrongly managed, it's that SS itself was never a good idea. Except, like for all Ponzi schemes, for the first few generations of recipients.

Now it is operationally in the red, and will grow worse every year until the "trust fund" is emptied around 2037. Which means we will have to either borrow more to cover the payments not covered by FICA receipts, or we will have to raise taxes to cover the additional red ink, or we will have to cut other parts of the budget in order to free up the money with which to pay back the trust fund, or we will have to change the program radically. Maybe some of all four? My worry is that if we "fix" it, which we really cannot do, then it will continue to exist, and all of its nefarious consequences will remain in place.

Like the racist outcome of SS. Or the criminal ROI numbers. Or the created ability to once again expand the federal government to do more that it should not do. Because every dollar SS gets that doesn't go to pay for admin for it, or benefits for those on it, by law (since 1935 too) must be used to purchase treasuries. What an insane way to do things. But we've done it. And we are in quite a pickle for it.

Rich, just and FYI, there is no possible way that we are going to be able to balance the budget right off the bat. It will take many years in order to bring it down to balanced. It will not happen overnight, anymore than Rome was built in a day. The main thing is to get people back to work, so we expand the tax base. Once that happens, and the unemployment is down to something much more manageable, then taxes can be raised to help lower the deficit more. SS was kind of mismanaged, considering the number of times Congress stole from it. I say stole but they said borrow, and never bothered replacing the money, so it equals stealing. I believe that is what Mac was referring to. I am not completely convinced that SS will stop being solvent in 2037. Considering that most of the baby boomers will be dead by then and they were the largest generation of users of it, unless our birth rates decrease even more, making fewer people paying into it. I see too many variables to make that a solid prophecy. If we keep getting more people to pay into it, it should be solvent for a longer period of time. If the amount paid into it needs to increase then, I am fine with that. Immigration and birth rates as well as the job situation can all have impacts on SS. It is a horse of a whole other color. It should not be a part of the general fund either. It should be separate. While bringing our troops home may serve to save some money, many of you want to put them to work on our borders, but I am not sure we are going to be able to contain Mexicos drug wars. We may end up having to intervene and I am not sure what the outcome of that would be. I mean, I believe we can take out the drug lords and end their drug war, but where will that actually leave us? Do we end up absorbing Mexico, and using their small border as our own, or do we leave and let them handle it from there? Could get sticky. Kind of an insane hypothesis but it is a very real possibility.

In whose dictionary is "compromise" defined as "doing exactly what one side demands, with no concession on their part"?

Sorry, spinning this as President Obama's fault isn't going to fly.

Republicans wanted to run the House.

Republicans promised to balance the budget while cutting taxes if they won the House.

All budgetary matters originate in the House.

What's their plan?

tthere plan is to blame oboma

Yeah, that'll work out WAY different than it did in 1995. Especially with a more popular President who doesn't have the personal baggage of Bill Clinton.

temporal:

They took all the money from SS to pay for the Wars, but never told us that was what they planned on doing ( a very carefully guarded secret, since they considered informing us based only on the need to know what they themselves decided we should be told). They acted as if we serve them rather than the other way around. Thanks to the deceitful Gestapos! Meanwhile they sent their buddy contractors over there to scam the Govt. even more while raking in enormous profits (high billions and more) for Chaney's former partners. And what did Chaney get out of it?!?! Then they left office after pardoning themselves of WAR CRIMES. Now that's what I call real brave role model leaders!!

caradjt:

That's easy for you to say, "No money!" And while you are at it, put a hold on your paycheck as-well-as all of Congress for a WHOLE YEAR. But give the soldiers their pay since they are out there actually doing something for our Country. Better yet, go over to the War Zone to fight without pay. Then we'll see how quick you are to whine. That would probably be the first time you ever did anything for your Country. Actually, I'd like to see all the soldiers come back home immediately and be given all the jobs coming from the whiners and Republicans.

Independent thinker - recheck history, The SS trust fund was transferred by LBJ in the 60's to the general fund. $$$ then used to fund the veitnam war or the war on poverty, take your pick.

Politicians have kept it broke ever since thinking that treasury iou's were going to cut it. Not only that but the politicians decided that they could also give the $$$ away to other programs not originally intended to be covered by our contributions.

Never met a politician yet that could let a pile of cash just sit around without wasting it. Have you?

Tom Strange - This is about as good as it gets. I couldn't have written this script any better if I tried. LOL!! The Republicans don't get it yet. They were elected to get Americans back to work not destroy what fragile jobs we have left, not try to stick it to women and gays by trying to turn the clock back on their rights, and not by trying to take access to health care away from Americans. They surely made a huge tactical error.....but then again, they always do.

Laurie - Sorry but I must have been asleep. Can you please site any examples of Republicans trying to stick it to the gays and women?

The best quote is "Read my lips..." which didn't work too well for George HW Bush either! Remember in the campaign..."Read my lips - no new taxes" (right)

The best quote is "Read my lips..."

Ranks right up with I did not have sexual relations with that woman...

RN in Philly

Obama is the one who doesn't want to sign off on a budget for 2011

As usual, spin it to the right, eh? You're fine with Bush's tax cuts increasing the deficit, but support the loss of real jobs to the middle class? You like to have your cake and eat it too? In other words, regardless of the President's decisions you will immediately go the opposite.

As Reid stated, Boehner doesn't want any debate over his proposed cuts, just jam it through. Why does that sound familiar? Again, I guess it's hunky-dory if a republican does it, eh?

Now, please explain to us average folk how this is creating any jobs as promised by your leader. How about any legislation proposed by the republicans to create jobs? Please explain his recent statement of how losing 250,000 jobs is a sacrifice he is willing to take or how it increases jobs. I will settle for any new legislation on anything other than his budget proposal.

Something isn't right here, the republicans started off reciting the Constitution ( and screwed it up), then voted to repeal legislation (with republicans who weren't sworn in properly), and proposes cutbacks that leave an additional 250,000 people unemployed with the insult to injury added... "so be it".

After all of that, you want me to believe that the republicans have my (individual) interest at heart?

Touchdownplay; you are a pig!

Just a joke. A little touchey there aren't we?

touchdownplay

so ur wife is gay ? cuzz last time i saw her she liked getting it stuck to her hahaha, feel good dufuss?

Hi Bosslimo, I think that the stimulus cost us economic growth and potential jobs, but I'd rather debate Obama's claim that it saved or created 3 million jobs. Even if I low-ball the spending to 600 bn, that is still $200k per job saved or created. Which is a number we will never recover in additional taxes paid in to the treasury. In other words, we became less wealthy, and less solvent, as a result of the massive spending.

It's my claim, and one I know you dispute, that cutting the federal budget will increase economic opportunity by an amount larger than the cuts made, and our nation will be wealthier for it. There are other goals satisfied by cutting government as well, namely more liberty for each of us, and closer adherence to constitutional limitations imposed on the feds, but you asked about how cutting the government would help us economically.

While I know you disagree with me (I've seen your posts long enough to realize you think larger government equals more economic opportunity) I would like you to consider just one reason among many I use to conclude what I do. I think you, and everyone you know, and everyone in the USA, when taken together, makes wiser decisions for themselves than the federal government can ever hope to make. Wiser both in terms of the dollar cost and in the return to the investor. It would be a very odd conclusion to make, imo, to say that people wanting something for free, paid for by someone else, who vote, will cause the government to act more wisely than individuals.

Anyhow, the simple answer to you is that a smaller government makes for more opportunity for us all.

Hey, give it a shot.

Obviously you and I disagree on what happens next.

Republicans are the ones touting no compromise or else...not Democrats. The President has been pretty clear he's willing to work with Republicans to find compromise but neither he nor the Democrats are going to be rolled by Republicans. So, if Republicans don't want to compromise, then they will be blamed when the government shutdown happens not Democrats. Sorry.

Anyone care to know the fastest way to cut govt. spending? Shut it down?

Can't spend if there is nothing to spend money on...

Hey Brutus, you waiting on your tax return? Have an elderly relative who gets Social Security? Fly in airplanes that need the FAA? How about those men and women fighting was half-a-world-away?

Hey differnt- won't affect the military much, we will still get up and do our jobs anyway. Sorry you can't use that. Quit trying to scare people without having facts.

Madison- sometimes you can't fix it you have to replace it.

there is always such talk about the stimulus law.....much of the stimulus money went into the pockets of the Middle class in the form of a tax cut....

now we have the republicans in office doing their very best to not only take money out of the pockets of the middle class...but to take their job as well...

maybe it is time for us to march again....to let our voices be heard...

Hey Ocie, remember that food, ammo, etc all have to be shipped to them? Stop paying all those civilian contractors and those shipments STOP.

Ocie Nelson

You might have had a point before much of the military's support services were contracted out. The contractors walk and it will be a total cluster.

Hey Ocie, will effect the military quiet a bit because you'll still get up to do your jobs, but you won't be paid, and you better not run out of anything. Sorry different can totally use that, because even though people on the right live in a fantasy world where everything falls from the sky without effort free of charge. Some of us know every item, and infrastructure system in the world requires people and money to run.

no jo,no bo, in nj: You are certainly right about that! Bill Clinton may not have been able to keep it in his pants, but he did know HOW to govern AND make compromises in order to pass legislation that benefited many people.

Yeah, and let's talk about their families back stateside or overseas. There will be no money coming in to buy food for their kids. Imagine what that will do for morale. Shades of the plebeian uprisings.

Interesting how you think Obama is the only one who spent. George Bush spent plenty - the war in Iraq and prescription drug coverage for Seniors (an even bigger spending bill than Obama has ever signed). I am not defending Democratic spending. I am merely pointing out that no Republicans threatened to cut off Bush and his spending program. They are hypocrites of the worst kind. If you truly believe (as I do) that the government needs to spend less; then you should believe and act that way no matter which party is in the White House.

Ocie Nelson

Hey differnt- won't affect the military much, we will still get up and do our jobs anyway. Sorry you can't use that. Quit trying to scare people without having facts.

=========================================================================

Yeah Ocie, the military will always support and defend this country. That's what they do. I doubt that you were ever in the military or better yet a military dependent.

Military members have families too, who depend upon their paycheck just like non-military members. Thay Sir is a FACT!

No Joe,

I'm really tired of the "rammed through a bill that the electorate didn't want". You are not the whole electorate, it's close to 50 50 for those for and against the bill, and some of against 50 thought it didn't do enough. I've spoken to every one of my physicians, specialists in a rather affluent community and school of medicine, and they all say that everyone needs to be insured.

Agreed, Bill Clinton, while inconsequential as a president, was nevertheless an unusually clever politician. I didn't like him much, but it was amusing to watch him weasel out of controversy again and again and absolutely confound the Reps. Obama is not that clever.

The Reps could just fund the popular stuff and let the rest just croak, but I doubt they have the courage to follow through on their talk. The deficit will remain vast until.... there is no other option. US creditors will need to enforce some responsibility. Washington cannot do it. It doesn't matter who's running the show. They rant and posture and blame and the situation persists.

Big fuss over nothing. Regards....

Watch what will happen next. The president, again, will concede to the republicans just to help the American people. He has given in every time so that we as a nation come out ahead. Want tax cuts? Sure you do, even started a new movement; Taxed Enough Already Party. So, in order to give the people what they want, the President concedes to the republicans, extending the tax breaks for the upper 2%. The people wanted healthcare reform, he conceded the public option and a slew of other amendments just to get it passed. Watered down by republicans so much, it barely helps anyone. But, concessions for the republicans so thier big business buddies can win.

Now, please tell all on what the republicans have conceded... (cricket... cricket)

Hey Bosslimo, wrong again. Let's just focus on the last claim, that Obama watered down healthcare reform in order to placate republicans. Republicans offered no amendments to alter the bill. Obama gave in, as you say, to the few dems, like Nelson and Lincoln, that were demanding concessions from him in order to secure their votes for passage. I wish you had your way and Obama was unyielding. If that were the case then those few senators needed for passage would have rejected the plan and we'd be far better off as a nation today. But Obama, as you claim, is not much of a leader, if by being a leader he sticks to his principles, and so we got saddled with this abomination.

rescue, above, is correct. Most every doctor, serving rich or poor or in between, would want every patient to have insurance. This only makes sense from a personal financial perspective. But it does little to alter the cost curve. Having more people in third party payer plans won't cause healthcare to become less costly as a whole. Having more people pay more for their own care would. If you believe that prices matter to behavior. If not, then I'm not sure what we can debate about.

Sorry Bosslimo, I forgot that you did have a question. Republicans compromised with Obama on unemployment benefits. So much for your cricket.

Dream on Laurie,

In case you didnt get the message from the Last Election the American people saw what the Democrats were trying to do and Rejected it..

Come 2012 they will reject it even more.

Steve - The American people want the jobs back. The election was about jobs not about cutting all kinds of programs that Americans have come to want and depend on. The election wasn't about taking rights away from women or gays, or ending funding for public broadcasting, the department of education or the arts. So apparently, the Republicans didn't get the message because the TP's only represent a very small minority of the people in this country. The independents don't give a damn about TP's and they're the ones that are looking on in horror at what Republicans are trying to do. I predict many of these TP elected legislators will be gone in the next election. Sorry to put a pin in your ballon. Remember something else, mid term elections are always old and whiter voters. Presidential years more minorities, women and young people come out to vote. Just keep pushing them and you'll see a landslide the other way come 2012.

Calling Boehner, Weeper of the House!....

Shut the government down? So be it!

The American people already know that YOU do not care!

Folks, everyone by now should be wary of all Repubs. Especially any Tea...., or organizations that have Patriot in the title, or FreedomWorks, Americans for Prosperity......they ain't talking about or advocating for the middle class!

Steve, you are wrong on that. I'm a retiree. You don't think I'd remember at the polls that some SOB caused me not to get my SS check because he grandstanded. I can't eat or pay my bills with principles. This grandstanding crap hurts people. Boehner needs to find another way to resolve this.

Um, you DO realize that all that needs to happen is for the House and Senate to declRe the Treasury department "essential", and then the checks continue to go out, right?

I would love to see Obama refuse to sign off on that.

THEN who would get the blame?

The American people want the jobs back.

Yup, we have wanted that since 2008. Both parties are to blame and until we totally gut each party of career politicians expect nothing but the same old song and dance out of Washington.

Um, you DO realize that all that needs to happen is for the House and Senate to declRe the Treasury department "essential", and then the checks continue to go out, right?

Um, you DO realize you just made an ass out of yourself again, right?

Kelly’s assertions are simply not true. One need look no further than the federal government shutdown of 1995 for proof. During the nearly four-week shutdown, Social Security checks were not mailed and Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements were disrupted. According to a Center for American Progress report entitled “The Big Freeze,” the shutdown ultimately “cost the American taxpayer over $800 million and rattled the confidence of international investors in U.S. government bonds.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/16/kelly-govt-shutdown/

Or is it your contention that Social Security & Medicare are NON-essential?

True RN.

Republicans hold all the power in the House of Representatives.

All budgetary matters originate in the House.

What will Republicans do to avert this crisis?

RN, you need to re-educate (or maybe just plain educate) yourself on the workings of the federal government and the Constitution. The President (no matter what party) PROPOSES a budget outline, Congress writes and passes APPROPRIATIONS BILLS that authorize the spending of the money that THEY pass as Budget Resolutions. NO President ever PASSES a budget, he/she only signs into law or vetoes the Appropriations bills after they have passed both houses of Congress.

Neither body of Congress bothered to pass a FY 2011 Budget Resolution by their May deadline last year, nor have any of the Committees passed any Appropriations bills. They have just been passing continuing resolutions (as they have for many years). I don't know what all this talk is about FY 2010 levels, when I could have sworn that the CR they passed a couple months ago was based on the FY 2008 Appropriations (a Bush FY, just as the 2009 FY was a Bush FY.)

The main strategy from Republican leaders is to create uncertainty for the American people. They hope to bring us to our knees. Once there, they hope we'll have no choice but to relinquish a few more rights and protections.

We know that making angry, negative movies is easy to do and requires zero creativity. But it takes real creativity to convince folks that we don't need what we desperately need, ie, decent wages, health care and education.

Because he's an arrogant, self-aggrandizing politician who has never understood what REAL Americans deal with every day. He's just an empty suit with a big mouth.

Why won't the President agree to the Republican war on the middle class? The President knows that for the country to flourish, we must have a middle class that is growing. The Republicans want two classes in this country, the entitled and the poor.

LOL! LIAR!

The federal government didn't even HAVE A BUDGET last year............I notice everyone still got their checks!

Obama is just blowing smoke! If they layoff at all, they will layoff NON-ESSENTIAL personnel..............and there's plenty of those!

I too am a federal employee. Our union is a big problem. When Obama said he would freeze wages for two years ( which I agree with, even though it effects me) the UNION said nothing. When the House of Rep said that there would be a freeze on new hires, The UNION sent out big emails and made there normal complaints about the Repub Congress. They are just a arm of the Democrats. They care nothing about the employee or the country. They are used by the Democrats for fund raising now.

"We are not highly paid layabout leeches sucking dry this country. We are hard working folks who often make less than they would do in industry (I know I do) because we love our country"

Yet as a selfless underpaid patriotic public servant, you somehow are able to post on a message board during your 'working' hours...or is that your job?

I hope you posted this message from your home and not while you were at work on my dime. Look around your office. What do you see? A bunch of overpaid non productive workers that ought to be told produce or hit the road. Oh, I forgot you are all union so forget and pressure to work hard............

Bob, how do you know what his working hours are? Ever heard of days off? and BTW I see YOU are posting during "working hours" too.

So if you're tired of being picked on, try getting a real job in the private sector! Get off OUR backs with your outrageous healthcare packages.

daqman...

40 US Forest Service employees sitting in their new multi-million dollar office in the middle of winter staring out the windows at a contract group of mostly minorities clearing their grounds of 2 feet of freshly fallen snow (instead of doing it themselves) with little else to do inside than figure out how best to "bend the rules a little" in order to hire their own family members, in-laws and friends for their (seasonal or otherwise) workforce above more (vastly) qualified individuals...It's a SAD joke in this community (among both laymen AND professionals) that we see every year...wasteful...send those that aren't needed home!

What galls my butt is the merry-go-round at the house and senate. Both parties are at fault but I don't see them cutting any of their many freebie perks or salaries.

I am a senior citizen and a disabled vet who has a fixed income and shrinking quickly because they say there isn't any inflation. It's easy for them since they don't pay almost anything. They don't buy gas at their expense along with healthcare. What do they care about is proving both reps and dems who is in charge as long as it doesn't hit their pocket book.

Not now maybe later the USA will have an Egypt type protest and if I could stand and walk I would be the first to go to a demo strike.

You must be so tired you didn't do your homework. Banks already charge a fee on every debit transaction, and it is way more than $0.12! They are working hard to make sure this measure dies because they want to keep charging whatever they want to charge, usually $0.48 per transaction, and yes this IS ALREADY BEING CHARGED!!! I do not receive Social Security, but I believe they are only required to have a bank accout for electronic deposit of benefits, SAVING taxpayers on fraud, theft, and postage. Whether seniors use a debit card to access their account is their choice. Using a debit card protects them from lost cash, and makes tracking their spending much easier for themselves or caregivers who are trying to help them get by.

As far as fees on derivitives, I think it appropriate to have a fund for cleaning up the next mess without having to do a bailout. I agree it should affect all traders equally, but then, how many "little guys" really do derivitives?

Amen DonR. Yes, seniors DO still have the option of direct deposit or mailed checks. Whether you write a check or use a debit card, you end up paying fees to the bank to spend your money that goes into your bank account either by DD or physical paper deposit, unless you are lucky enough to have a "service free senior" account. The only way to NOT pay a fee to a bank is to cash your paper check......oops, most banks won't cash a check unless you have an account with them, and most businesses won't cash a Social Security check either.

"SS recipients are now being FORCED to take their benefits via a debit card."

Please show proof of this, I would like to see it. The reason I ask, is because I am on SS, and have not had anyone force a debit card on me. I would love to know who is making this crap up, so they can be made to eat their words.

Don, as someone on social security, the deposits can be made electronically directly into ones bank account, then checks can be written or bills paid on line, without the use of a debit card. The person above who said that he asked his mom and dad who were on social security what they wanted, and they said, " shut it down, they don't want to past the burden on to their children." Apparently his parents have additional sources of income they can fall back on, many seniors do not. The cost of my medication a month exceeds what I receive in social security, and as a side note, when the healthcare bill passed (which I'm for) the cost of medications were to be reduced, while seniors were in their $4,000.00 donut hole. Within one month, every prescription I'm on was increased in cost by at least a third by the pharmaceutical companies, and one drug went from $300.00 to $600.00 for a month's supply in one month.....and since several of the medications are not on the part D formulary, that $400.00 a month I spend doesn't even go toward my $4000.00 donut hole. Part D was one of the worst things for many seniors that Bush instituted. When he did that, a senior was unable to buy a supplemental insurance policy that had medication benefits. So rather than paying co pays every month, spread over time, we will have co pays, but then enter that donut whole where you pay for everything retail until the more than $4,000.00 is paid out. Many seniors then stop their necessary medication because they can't afford it. I'm so sick of hearing Medicare and social security as entitlements, as if it's some dirty money that the lazy collect. I do not consider myself a burden on society. I worked for 40 years paying into the system, and each month and pay for my Part A, my Part B Medicare, my part D drug coverage and a supplemental insurance policy to pick up what Medicare doesn't pay. People treat it as if it's some "free lunch" program and I'm sick of it.

Its a republic Stupid. You comments are not even true. You have been watching MSNBC and listening to the idiots there. Sorry you are so confused.

Easy eagle, I'm not the one that works for the federal government.

The ones with the supreme control are the ones that are letting the American tax payer down, not the minions on the payroll.

So, don't take it personally.

Insisting on referring to the US as a "republic" instead of a "democracy" (when both are correct, and more correct still is "republican democracy") is yet another hiccup lifted from the John Birch Society.

Thanks to the Koch brothers for resurrecting their Dad's crazy brand of Conservatism and spending vast sums marketing it to a new generation.

eagle376

Its a republic Stupid. You comments are not even true. You have been watching MSNBC and listening to the idiots there. Sorry you are so confused.

Woow, you republicans need to stay off Glenn Beck's black board.

It's both and they two terms are used interchangeably. is that confusing?

Now, I know why Beck uses the term republic. it makes tea bagger proud

It's both and they two terms are used interchangeably.

While it may be both (on different levels) they shouldn't be used interchangeably. Republic and democracy mean completely different things in terms of form of government. In a republic the sovereignty lies in each individual person while in a democracy the sovereignty lies in the group. America is a democracy when speaking in terms of type of government but in terms of form of government a democracy is no more than mob rule. Really the difference is substantial and I suspect the terms are only used interchangeably by those that are ignorant to what each means in terms of form of government.

Oh look, someone else who gets all their political education from Professor Beck. I hope you have plenty of gold stashed away for the impending world economic collapse.

mkaipo, yes, it`s quite a tactic, isn`t it? Funny how people forget, that a furlough doesn`t always mean "without pay". It`s just so strange, that the government forgets to add those "without pay" words after they use the word furlough though, isn`t it?

But in the case of the Congress, make sure they don't get the back pay.

And no paid congressional health insurance either.

RcTx3 - The country is broke because Republicans have been giving the wealth of the country away to the richest among us and the corporations. Period....it's a proven fact that is what has happened. All you have to do is go back and look at history over the last 30 years. See the percentage of wealth of this country held by the richest 1 or 2% back in 1970 and see where that figure is today.

yes, yes, if only the republicans had maintained total control of the congress and presidency then everything would have been fine. unless the republicans are willing to kill the sacred elephant in the room of the defense budget we will continue on the path to national bankruptcy.

RN in Philly

If McCain had won, the economy would be better, unemployment lower, and the deficit and debt lower. Now is not the time for an Obama-brand Democrat to lead the nation. If we were in a booming economy, this would be a different story.

==========================================================================

I've read some wild, silly, and utterly astounding ridiculous posts on this board but RN yours is by far the looniest yet.

You don't like Obama, hey anyone reading any of your posts gets that. But you really need to get back on those non-hallucinating medications cause child, you have really lost it with this post.

McCain, and by extension Palin? Whao Nelly!!

I was kind of hoping that RN was doing satire, thinking that NO ONE could be that stupid. But, that really was stupid. Do you remember what McCain did during the campaign and the fiscal crisis was coming to light?

That's not true, rick. They were sent to Washington to representand serve ME, and anyone else who values conservative ideals. You know, just like the Democrats were sent to Washington to represent and serve those who value liberal ideas. Time to accept the fact that not everyone feels the way you do about like every issue - kind of like I had to accept that same reality when Obama was elected president. We can't always get what we want all the time, you know.

True that, joe p. Now try telling Boehner that.

Bob - In case you haven't studied history lately....big government is what has kept a healthy middle class going in this country. Are you suggesting we go back to the way it was at the turn of the last century when there were rich and poor and very few middle class folks because that's where we're heading if you get your way.

How do you explain the fact the Reagan, and Bush 43 grew the size of Government? I thought they were republicans.

Bob - It was Bush that grew government MORE than any president in recent history. Obama has not significantly added government jobs so where is your backing on this?? And Clinton, the last democrat, actually shrunk government by a huge amount... However, you were so busy crying about how he was a Democrat you didn't notice!

So this BS about Democrats and "Big government" is just that ... BS.

The difference is, the Republicans want to grow the government THEY want (Defense, Healthcare, etc) and have someone else pay for it!

Uh, Beaker?

Read this

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-11-10-1Afedpay10_ST_N.htm

Yeah. That Obama. Real fiscal conservative.

Uh no Joe.. you do realize this BS fact is contradicted everywhere if you actually did ANY homework?

The reason why federal salaries appear higher is because jobs like “janitor” are farmed out to contractors (who are paid FAR more than an actual janitor would make). So when you look at the total workforce of Federal employees it is made up of people that have to manage contractors. This is based on laws that say the jobs need to be performed by contractors!!

So when you take all the low wage earners out of an equation you only have the management so of course it appears far higher for the total workforce, because they don’t include janitor like a private company would.

If you look at a real study on it you’ll see federal workers are paid FAR LESS than their private sector counterparts. But that would be too much like research for you and you couldn’t rant like an idiot.

http://fcw.com/articles/2010/09/20/senator-rebuts-myth-of-overpaid-feds.aspx and there are FAR better articles about it on the net.. take a moment and read!

Hey NJNB, ever heard of Davis-Bacon Wage Rates? If not, look them up. Then you will know why Contractors working for the Federal Gov't get higher wages than there civilian counterparts.

By the way, Davis-Bacon laws were pushed by the business community so that working for the government could be more profitable. Yeah, free market exchange at its best.

You do realize that our men and women fighting overseas will not receive a pay check, supplies, etc.; their families will be without an income. Seniors and the disabled will be without checks they need. Your state won't receive money from the federal government either. Trickle down disaster is apparently your idea of fixing the problem.

Jody, better get Gramps some cans of dog food because if the government shuts down he will not have anything to eat. That is what the Progressives claim.
And buy your own gun for protection because our military will not be reporting for work.

Not true, Jody. The military is ALWAYS categorized as "essential", and unaffected by shutdowns.

Ditto FAA.

I would, however, suggest you renew your passport sooner, rather than later. They don't shut down state, but a lot of them do get furloughed.

Honestly, you people need to wake up to the new century, its realities. See, there is this thing called the Internet, and it allows people to get information pretty quickly, which is really helpful in debunking misinformation.

The checks will go out. The mail will get delivered. The planes will fly.

Bunch if file clerks will get an unexpected vacation, though. Disney might get pretty crowded.

I hate to burst all of you people bubble but most of you are grossly incorrect. SS payments will go out unless there is a glich, you are new to the system or you have changes. These will not be processed. Let even one granny not get paid and you have a problem. Also, when public employees are out of work at least an equal number if not more private employees suffer. Businesses around facilities suffer greatly if the facilty shutters and they never get that money back, ever. Ditto for government contractors. You people need to get a grasp of how the economy works before you yap.

Who's going to process those payments, chris? Sure, it's computerized but it was in '95 as well. The machines don't run themselves. Envelopes don't come prestuffed. Mail doesn't walk itself to the loading docks.

Oh, and it won't take very long for available cash to be shuffled about to meet immediate needs. That means nonessential payments will be postponed.

Like your tax refund, for example.

Laurie-

I have read many of your posts, and I can't help but wonder what you would say about my situation. You love to talk about the "ability to have a better life for {your} family", and yet at the same time, you seek to tax the hell out of anyone who makes a good salary. I am from a blue collar family. I worked my way through college by loading beer trucks with a union(!) job. I then borrowed money for medical school. After working for $2.43 an hour for five years (we figured it out the night before graduation), I now have a job that makes me "wealthy." Never mind that I owe 6 figures for student loans, and that I have no assets to my name. From reading your posts, I deserve to be rewarded for my hard work by being forced to pay more taxes! So much for your claim about being able to provide a better life for my family, huh? Obviously, I only got this salary by exploiting the working class of this country, right? Come on - your class warfare crap is tiresome. I used to feel the same way you did - untilI decided to do something about it 16 years ago. Somehow, I doubt that you ever will, other than to put your hand out for what someone else works for.

Good post, Laurie. Ignore the naysayer.

Jpe - I only have one thing to say to you and that is the American primary school public education that you received allowed you to do everything else in your life. Republians want to take that away from Americans. The taxes you pay....many of those taxes go to support the elderly and disabled in this country and one day you will be there too and perhaps you won't need to depend on SS and Medicare so much in your old age because you were successful but let me tell you another story my friend.....My parents worked hard too. My father had his own business for decades. He was a business man. He never depended on anyone. Then one day he lost everything....My parents were in their sixties with nothing...wiped out. Then my dad had a stroke from the stress of losing everything. Fortunately for him he was already 65 and was able to get his SS and Medicare and my mom too which saved my parents from having to live in poverty. Now they live modestly but with dignity and don't have to depend on their children for support which I would gladly give them if they needed it. So you see Joe...one never knows what life will bring them. Thank god our government and FDR and LBJ had the forsight to see that people in the waning years of their lives or those that have catastophe hit them will be protected.

Thanks, Joe. The fact of the matter is that liberals do not believe anyone can make it on their own- the "wealthy" were born that way, they believe. After all, their own lives prove to them that "someone" is preventing them from getting ahead.

These are adults who do not understand the difference between wish and want.

They see the government as some sort of tooth fairy, who will come in the night, remove money from those who earn it, and give it to the "deserving" - which is, by the way, them.

When that does not happen, they feel cheated- not by the government, but by those who achieve.

It would be sad, if one of them did not currently occupy the White House. That makes it downright scary.

joe paraceratherium - You are pathetic!

You have NO idea what real wealth is if you think you are wealthy... The type of tax cuts that the republicans just pushed through are for those that are making millions of dollars a year. If you were doing that, you wouldn't have 6 figures of student loans to pay off and no assets.

Go ahead, keep thinking you're one of the "wealthy".... but in reality, you aren't even close! You are already the one paying more in taxes compared the the "wealthy"

You are a bonehead. The govt has been cutting taxes for the last 50 years and the country keeps falling behind. Now the govt gives a TAX CUTS to the wealthy and PINK SLIPS to the working class and you want to whine about your precious money? No one cares about your money. No one wants a dime from your stingy hand. But the govt has to be payed for. You can't cut the jobs and services of the working folks, give tax breaks to the wealthy and expect the country to still be here. So if you want to say "I don't want to pay for the govt" fine. It won't be here for you. Go practice medicine on an foreclosed house, cause you wont have any patients to treat...then how are you gonna pay your student loans (which were probably subsidized by the govt). You can't sell services to people who don't have jobs. You need to support your customers for the future. Just goes to show what they say is true, medical doctors are terrible businessmen.

Joe paraceratherium-

Well if you are a doctor you must have either went into the wrong medical field or a bad doctor so don't get on Laurie. I don't feel sorry for you being a doctor making 6 figures and you probably procrastanateed with paying those loans. If you took out loans it looks like you had your hand out too once upon a time.

Great post Joe.

Beaker-

Ouch. Please note the quotation marks around the word wealthy. That is because Obama has been pooling me in with those who are truly wealthy (note the lack of quotation marks). You know, how the democrats say that anyone who makes more than $250000 a year is wealthy. And no, I am not pathetic, but thank you for assuming the worst about me.

And Laurie-

I have life insurance and disability insurance in place should anything happen to me. You know, because some liberals want to means test social security, so I cannot even count on being treated equally to other workers in this country. Anyone who depends on the government for their livlihood is delusional.

Unsilent majority-

I am not allowed to put off my loan repayments - I started them the day I started my practice. (Besides, a loan is not a handout, but nice try!) During all of those years in medical school and residency, however, I did learn how to spell procrastinate, though. And as for being a "bad doctor," sorry to disappoint you. Two years into practice as a fellowship-trained surgeon, and I am already scheduling cases four months out. I forgive your class envy, because in my eyes you are my fellow countryman. No greater and no lesser. That is all I ask from you - treat me the way I treat you. One set of rules for all Americans. Unlike you, I will save my vitriol for the Chinese.

Joe and No Joe, you are missing the point.

Granted, we may noot all be as forward thiniking, or successful, or wealthy as you. But we do want that chance, both for us and for our children. Current GOP initiatives seek to fundementally change the way America works. They seek to take away opportunity. They seek to transfer unequal advantages to corporations. They seek to defund public programs like the arts and EPA.

I tire of hearing the same mantra about improving oneself, moving one's home and life, understanding the differnece between wish and want. It's nice that both of you are comfortable. Not everyone has had the same opportunities or the same life as you. Not everyone has encountered the same hardships or events in life. What works for you doesn't work for me, and vice versa.

I am not asking for a handout, I am asking for a fair chance. Just like the one you had.

-fielden - you alone control your opportunities. Think hollywood actors and those now famous in the music world just had everything go their way? How about Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, think they didn't experience failure? The list can easily go on and on

It is apparent that you have quit on life by making excuses and becoming accustomed to others consoling you in an attempt to give you the pity you crave. Wonder what excuses you give for obama, was everything handed to him? I doubt it, but he was willing to go out and make things happen for himself and his family and for what he believed in.

Wealth and riches are but a state of mind.

Joe,

I'm truly disgusted by your self-righteous attitude. Number 1, I have worked all my life and have my post graduate degree, and being in the medical field, being "scheduled case four months out" doesn't necessarily make you a good doctor. I have no class envy of you, I have concern for your patients because your bedside manner and treatment of the "lowly staff" must be horrendous. Get over yourself.

Do I detect the little green-eyed monster rearing it's head here, rescue dog?

Am I right in believing that you pay taxes on income after all deductions/ tax breaks etc have been taken? Perhaps the doc needs to talk with a good financial planner/accountant? Just saying........

If the doc is scheduling patients 4 months out, why is it that some folks were dissing a public option in the USA, which they said would be like the Canadian or European healthcare system, stating that patients there have to wait months to get care, unlike in the USA where with private health insurance, the patient supposedly does not have to wait (although I have never seen this -lack of wait time- occur here in the US)?

Please explain, Madison, what happens when the U.S. Government defaults because stubborn people think the debt ceiling is the cause of our financial woes.

if the debt ceiling isn't raised the american era will come to an immediate and abrupt end. a new republican president in 2012 could then thump his chest and proclaim loudy about his mandate from the people as he presides over the scorched wreckage of our economy.

Madison, macro and national economics do not work like household budgets. In other words, simple math does not work at that level, the math is actually quite complex.

Jody, 425gk425, who gets stuck paying this national debt? It sure won`t be just this generation that debt, but our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren right along with us. So is this what it`s all about? Just so we can keep the lifestyle we are use to having? This overbearing, money oriented society, from the top down, is tearing your so called "American era" apart. The American era, the land of make a buck more than the other person, no matter what you have to do to, or who you have to screw, to get that buck. Maybe it is time it fails, that way, this whole country, from the rich, on down to the poorest of the poor, will all be on one level field.

Why the H, should our future generations be made to pay for the debt we are creating now? What do they have to look forward to, if government borrowing isn`t stopped now? One H of a national debt that will be much larger, that`s what. That`s called shafting our future hope.

Only, @ 23.4 perhaps instead of worrying about debt being left to greatgrand children one should worry about the present and what is happening to folks now so they can even plan on having a family in the first place.

If people do not survive today, there will be no children much less grandchildren to leave debt to imo.

So worrying about the future when one is not even sure of the present is just an exercise in futility imo.

Great post, goldpointe. It continues to amaze me the way the Republicans are able to convince middle and low-middle class voters to support the Republicans when it is against their own interest to do so. Their willingness to be pawns reminds me of the poor farmers during the Civil War who fought for the Confederacy to preserve slavery for the rich.

goldpointe - So help out by please sending extra money to the IRS. Mark the check for whatever areas you thing need more money in the government. If 25% of the federal workers were fired and the remaining 75% were told to produce or get out you would see an improvement in government services.

Terrific post, goldpointe. Makes you wonder if it will take for the outrage of harding working citizens in Madison, Wisconsin to spread throughout the country. I'm hoping not too long.

Excellent post goldpointe. Nothing more to add to that. You've said it all.

How much would like to tax that RICH 1%?

Even if everybody paid 100% of their wages it would still not pay our national debt.

We need to treat this like it is anyt other household spending

Curb spending - cut back on non-essentials

Come up with a fair flat tax tiered by income level cut all write offs and STOP giving refunds to people that have not paid any tax AND stop giving refunds for $5,000 to people that paid in $1,800 just because they have 4 kids

Get rid of 90% of the IRS

Cut the dept of education and energy

Stop farm subsidies

Increase age of Social Security to 67

Fix the fraud in medicaid and medicare

Great post Goldpointe!! AWESOME!!

I believe Goldpointe is missing the "Pointe". The federal government needs to cut spending. I don't care if you are rich, poor, or in the middle. I thought the tax compromise was good considering that as part of the middle class, I wasn't too happy about my taxes going up to pay for those who get refunds without paying anything. As far as blaming this on the Republicans, wake up. Both parties are responsible for the mess we are in. The Democracts can't quit spending on entitlements and the Republicans can't quit protecting the rich.

marine - good points

Goldpointe - you forgot to mention on how it is private sector business and private sector taxpayers that pay the wages and bennies of the government workers and for government programs. If you have, New jersey has a bridge in need of repair that it will gladly sell to you. I also understand that Ohio is also interested in selling its toll roads as well.

Seems that states are looking to cash out infrastructure to pay down their debt. Bloomberg news reported earlier today that not only wisconsin wants to renegotiate with unions but also Ohio.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-17/public-employee-union-protests-spread-from-wisconsin-to-ohio.html

Can anyone say Greece?

There is only one answer. We must empty the treasury into the hands of the top 20.

We need to spend. In order to spend we need revenues. For revenues we need business to pay taxes. High taxes, so that they are incentivised to put money back into the economy in the form of jobs, benefits, infrastructure etc. The accumulators must be strangled.

Do you see that democrats and Obama? This is how you should have been, instead of caving in to every republican demand. I bet you they won't cave in, in order to try and appear Bi-partisan. Stupid trick will probably work anyways. Obama will cave in. He has no back bone.