E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC's Libby Leist
Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday he hopes to have an agreement on a deficit reduction plan by the end of the month before the July 4th Congressional recess.
A deal would be only a first step as the group would then have to turn the plan into legislation and vote on it before the U.S hits the debt ceiling on Aug 2.
Biden's proposed deadline would give lawmakers a month to debate and implement the plan.
Speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill, Biden said the bipartisan deficit reduction group is now tackling "the really hard stuff" and "making real progress." He predicted well over a trillion dollars in spending cuts and said he expects a "serious downpayment" on the goal of cutting 4 trillion over 10-12 years.
"I think we're going to be in a position hopefully that by the end of the month, by the Fourth of July recess, we have something to take to the leaders," Biden said.
The lawmakers in the talks include Sen. Kyl (R-AZ), Sen. Inouye (D-HI), Sen. Baucus (D-MT), Rep. Cantor (R-VA), Rep. Van Hollen (D-MD), and Rep. Clyburn (D-SC). The White House team is led by Vice President Biden, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, plus OMB director Jack Lew and Director of the National Economic Council Gene Sperling.
Rep. Van Hollen told reporters after the meeting the group talked primarily about discretionary spending today. He did not offer any more specifics.
Leave a Comment:
Even with this agreement on reducing the deficit, the GOP will wait till the last cat is hung before raising the debt limit - just good conservative posturing!
This will be interesting... all I've got to say Joe, is Medicare & Medicaid had better be OFF the table!
If it isn't you can kiss your 'base' good-bye!
We've compromised enough & it's well past time you show us the spine of steel you brag about!
Step back and look what all that comprise have accomplished - NOTHING!
Ok Feisty gal it's analysis time.
$.40 of every dollar spent is borrowed. You ok with that? Do you find that to be sustainable?
The average worker pays in $55k in medicare, but takes out $150k (male), $185k (female). Again, sustainable? A two earner household pays in $109k and takes out over $350k. That's ok with you, you see no problems there?
So what is it going to be - kiss the democratic base good bye, or the entire country because you choose the easy, but obviously unsustainable path.
Feisty?
Maybe its time for a patriotic party, composed of non partisan progressives and independents. We could hire some buses from the Koch brothers.
If medicare and medicaid are off the table we are doomed as a country. We have 14 TRILLION in debt and anywhere from 60-100 TRILLION in future promises. Taxing will not fix the problem, there are currently 1,210 billionaires in the WORLD worth approximately 4.5 trillion which would not even cover 3 years of Obama budget shortfalls. Get real people, this are going to have to change and it sure isn't the "hope and change" someone was talking about 3 years ago.
Uh Oh!
Looks like Agent Orange has some splainin to do.... lol
Spanky don't expect anything from her that means anything soon.
This woman is a dyed in the wool far left liberal who wants everything for nothing. She talks about having a job but posts all day on this website. Her job is being a shill for the Dems and not anything real or productive. I read her junk to have a laugh.
All their talk about losing Medicare as we know it is just bull. Obama already did that by cutting 500 billion from that to help pay for Obama care, one of his many wealth redistribution programs. Still haven't seen the doc fix addressed either.
I hope they do lose their base. Would be the best thing that happens to us.
BTW looks like your boy has to 'splain Lybia to Congress. How's that going for you???
Spanky. We would not need to borrow so much if you republicans had not decimated the tax base. You have done enough damage with your trickle down nonsense, now either help, or get out of the way while the rest of us look for real solutions.
HI, Feisty: I'm back! Time for the Republican party to get serious, and put the American people first, not their corporate masters. Will be interesting to see how far they carry this charade.
Wow-
VP Biden expects spending reductions of "well over" $1 trillion in the current debt limit negotiations...and, he's talking about a "serious downpayment" toward an ultimate $4 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade.
Biden's beginning to sound like a born-again Teapartier...
Heck...he's even starting to sound like President Obama's own debt commission!
Can his boss be far behind?
lol
Come on Patrick - taxes are the lowest they've been in 60 years and it's still not enough to satisfy them!
Look at Pawlenty & Bachmanns plans...
Good to see you NDD - I was thinking about you earlier!
Obviously these baggers & birthers are comfortable with 2% of this country ruling the remaining 98%!
It's wealth distribution all right - robbing from the poor & handing it to the rich! ;o)
Spanky,
You are absolutely correct that what the average person puts into medicare and what they receive is about 3.5 times to 1. HOWEVER, if this money is invested in INVESTMENT GRADE SECURITIES in the AA and AAA ratings category, the return over the average worker's working years, the investment will double every 10 years. The average worker works approximately 40 to 45 years. Do the math yourself and you will see this is factual. This is how 401K plans are supposed to work. Small contributions in very sound investments over a long period of time! The investment only needs to return an average of 5% per annum to accomplish more than enough to fund medicare. Same is true for Social Security! I don't want you to take my word, please look carefully at the numbers. Of course the government cannot borrow from the medicare or social security fund for this to work to EVERYONES' satisfaction. The funds must be fully invested at all times!
Exactly right, Feisty: If the Republicans were to be honest, the class warfare is their modus operandi.
Perhaps if the 47% of the people who pay NO FEDERAL Tax contributed something, the others wouldn't did their heels in so far. Think about it.
Are you kidding? You're back to this talking point?
47% pay NO taxes because they are what's known as the working poor!
Try this on for size 47% of Tea Bagger pay NO federal withholding:
ANNA , MOLLY, oh good golly.
Your Supreme Court just issued it's ruling on Walker's bill.
Sorry, it appears to be squarely in favor of Walker.
But you expected this, correct? Hey, maybe that sleeping giant will re-awake.
You just never know.
The same tired talking points from the right. Still without foundation or source. It looks like these are not going to come true REGARDLESS of how many times they are repeated. Sigh...
Spanky-
This was a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling, correct?
I guess (special) elections really DO have consequences!
Yeah fielden I am so in love with the $14 Trillion debt "talking point." But totally do not forget about the "Obama just blew through another $1 Trillion in the last three months" talking point. That one rocks too.
Say fielden do you know what the projected deficit is this year? Crazy right?
Oh, wait fielden, ho about the "medicare is insolvent and will soon go under" talking point. You like that one? Yeah, me too.
Talking point are neat, right?
But my favorite is you all better back off of the tit, cause the tit be runnin' dry. Yep. that's an oldie but a goodie.
Yep Mixed Bag. Wisconsin Supreme Court. I scanned it. It's long, but bottom line appears to be total victory for Walker.
Suck it libbies.
But come on, did anyone really thing cutting and running would work out for a legislature? Of course not. Actions and elections have consequences.
Ursula-279622 I disagree!
Politics aside. I am an investor with 30 years experience, and have many friends who also are serious investors.
What the Republicans are doing is reckless, not conservative.
Everyone agrees we need to address the deficit. Nobody I know except angry amateurs are agreeing with using the threat, of not raising the debt ceiling, as a political tool.
We are already seeing adverse affects of the Republican threat. This is dangerous, not "prudent" or "smart."
Scrambolo,
You're right about the magic of investing and compounding. Unfortunately, the social security and Medicare "lock boxes" are quite empty of real money - just piles of Treasury bonds (borrowed money). I like your idea of investing in corporate debt for the higher returns. Plus, the corporations would be able to use that money to innovate and expand. Of course, those afraid of the private sector would never take on that kind of risk (remember Enron, Lucent, Lehman, General Motors - and what happened to their bonds?)
You did make an excellent argument for allowing people to invest their own social security money in private accounts.
Cautiously Optimistic One - I'll try to include winks and smiley faces next time with my sarcasm.
Scrambolo - are those sound investments the same ones that caused my 401K to drop 40% in 2008?
Ursula-279622,
*blush*
My bad, I should have realized you were being sarcastic. I hope you understand, that some people (way too many) are actually cheering the Republicans on this one. Your sarcasm was just a little too close to the words coming from low-information posters.
Spanky -- OMB says that Social Security and Medicare are still running surpluses of around $50 to 60 billion per year. You know - taking in more revenue than the programs are spending. That means the government is NOT borrowing money to pay benefits for these programs. The data is available from the GPO. Check Table 13.1.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/hist.html
Unfortunately for your argument - that means the $0.40 of every dollar spent is being spent elsewhere. I wonder where? These tables do not categorize the budget and revenue data the same way as the government tables but they are easier to read.
http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/yearrev2011_0.html
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year2011_0.html
The data shows that defense spending accounts for $0.84 of every dollar of income tax revenue (that is individual plus corporate income tax). Interest on the Federal debt accounts for $0.18 of every income tax dollar collected. Those two budget items alone are already running a deficit. We are out of money before we even begin talking about the rest of the discretionary budget. I presume you agree that defense should be paid for with income taxes, right? Defense is not supposed to be covered by payroll taxes, right?
So we have too much discretionary spending that is not supported by income tax revenue. So your solution is to whack Social Security and Medicare because they are still running a surplus? In political economic terms, is this the new VooDoo?
That $61 trillion unfunded obligation you are worried about is spread over 75 years. It's an accounting gimmick. That $61 trillion amounts to a household earning wages of $55,000 a year paying $593 a month in FICA taxes. That is not additional payroll taxes -- that is exactly what they are paying NOW. That means that WORKING people will have invested (through FICA taxes) $61 trillion for Social Security retirement.
Oh, those surpluses are invested in government securities. I do not recall the number and cannot find it at the moment - I think, those securities earn about 3.6 per cent. Banking and investment houses already got a $3.4 trillion welfare check from the government, I do not really think they need more. BTW, that $3.4 trillion welfare check was added to the national debt - maybe that is why the debt has grown so much over the past 2 years.
http://www.usfederalbailout.com/TARP_summary
To the comment about 47 pct of Americans not paying taxes - that is factually wrong. Most everyone IS paying income taxes. Check the REAL facts instead of the talking points.
http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=133521,00.html
Now do you understand why the Republicans are going to be the losers next cycle? If you run on empty talking points - then all you can offer are empty promises. Maybe that is why the debaters cannot offer solutions - because they do not understand the problems. GIGO - GIGO - GIGO.
One and done looks about right - you just have the party affiliation wrong. Stick a fork in it - it's done? Looks like the GOP are the ones that are forked.
Nerm...go read the Medicare Trustees report and get back to us with some legitimate numbers.
Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are underfunded.
Obama is overspending by 2.3 trillion this year alone and he's talking about cutting 4 trillion over 12 years?? Uhmmm....not even close to enough. Republicans need to dig in and vote NO to any increase on the debt ceiling. Let the government learn to live within it's means. If that means lowering funding for EVERYTHING across the board...good!
Shall we talk about leaders violating the constitution and laws?
Obama's lack of upholding his constitutional responsibility to protect the borders?
Obama directing the Attorney General not to uphold law?
Obama's clear violations of the War Powers Act?
...I'll even go for the little one...aiding and abetting a criminal. Let's find out how long Obama knew his aunt was living here, on government welfare, in government subsidized housing as an illegal alien that had deportation orders.
Obama has clearly violated the constitution and laws he swore to uphold. He should be removed from office.
Feisty...let me save you the trouble of typing your inane, whining response..."Bush did it too!!!"
My prediction. They're just toying with you Joe.
If they are dealing with Joe Biden......then all is well......not too worry......everything is under control......it's no "big fn deal"........so long as he does not take a nap half way through the negotiations....................Boehner will toy with him right up until the midnight hour and get what he wants as usual.........Biden will be sound asleep by then. They should ask Hillary to step in for Biden.....(an Obama).
Spanky- "Ok Feisty gal it's analysis time."
Don't confuse her with facts - her mind is already made up. I'm reminded of a line by Jack Nicholson in the movie 'A few good men' when it comes to Feisty - "The truth? You can't handle the truth".
I look forward to a few choice expletives from her.
As or Joe (Recovery Summer) Biden, his track record leaves much to be desired.
When I saw that "if" I got a little suspicious.
Why would it seem safe to assume unless you are grasping at straws to make your point?
I would have to say the author of that diatribe had a political point to make and did not care how much he stretched the truth to make it. Why do you trust people like that Feisty?
scrambolo "Spanky, You are absolutely correct that what the average person puts into medicare and what they receive is about 3.5 times to 1. HOWEVER, if this money is invested in INVESTMENT GRADE SECURITIES in the AA and AAA ratings category, the return over the average worker's working years, the investment will double every 10 years. The average worker works approximately 40 to 45 years. Do the math yourself and you will see this is factual."
It's hard to know where to begin with your nonsensical post, but let's try.
1 - All money taken in by the government is never 'invested in AA or AAA securities' - It's spent by the government and IOUs are given that pay about 3%, so the 'doubling' is every 24 years, not 10 years. That 3% will probably just cover inflation, so there is no actual net 'investment' gain.
2 - Your analysis assumes that all of the worker's 'contributions' to Medicare are paid up front, but they are actually paid gradually over the typical worker's 40 - 45 year work career.
3 - The figures Spanky quoted took into account any 'investment' income by Medicare, and the program is still headed for bankruptcy in about 13 years.
If you 'do the math', you will see that the program is totally unsustainable, and Spanky is correct.
Feisty
They aren't "the working poor" They are non-liability voters. If they paid their fair share instead of working and taking money we all would be better off.
Feisty
There are only a few options available to put Medicare on a sound basis and avoid it becoming bankrupt in about 13 years (government's estimate);
1 - Try to control costs through something like a voucher system (Ryan's plan).
2 - Drastically reduce the amount that the government pays for Medicare, leaving the balance for the retirees to pay out of pocket.
3 - Increase the amount that each worker pays into Medicare - An estimated increase in Medicare taxes of about $125 per month for a typical worker.
4 - Some combination of the above.
I had to laugh at a recent 'Poll' that showed that only 31% of respondents thought that Medicare should be 'adjusted', and 69% thought it should be left alone. That's like asking people "Would you like to continue getting a free lunch, or would you prefer to pay for part of it?". I'm surprised that even 31% of them recognized that Medicare has a huge problem looming. The reality is that Medicare MUST be adjusted, and the above options are what we must deal with (unless anyone thinks of something I overlooked).
PS - The last actuarial estimate for Medicare is that the 'Unfunded Liability' (the difference between the expected money available and the projected costs promised) was about $36 Trillion, which is close to the estimated net worth of the entire nation - the total savings of every American - rich or poor.
Joe-755363
The 2011 OASDI Trustee's Report can be found here.
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/oact/TR/2011/index.html
The 13 year projection for Medicare includes the current poor national economic performance (which affects the extrapolation from prior trends) and is affected by projected increases in costs of health care (extrapolated from prior trends). I did not find if the projection is only for Medicare A & B or if it also includes Medicare D. The legislation for Medicare D did not include a mechanism for funding that program AND prohibited the SSA from managing the program as it does Medicare A & B.
Links to the various methods of making short and long range projections are also available. It appears that the models are based on a feed-forward method that basically extrapolates past trends into the furture. The models are predicting population, demographics, benefits, costs, and national economic performance over a 75 year period. The forecasts and pojections are determined using mathematical models - much like a climate model. The OASDI report is similar to forecasting what the weather will be in 75 years.
Just as with climate change (or global warming); the OASDI forecast indicates a negative systematic trend and suggests that something should be done to adjust the projected trend. Accepting the validity of the forecast model as a given, the projection is that outlays surpass revenue.
True, the standard American business model is to immediately 'cut costs'. Business does that through layoffs, reducing hours, cutting benefits, etc. Basically you are proposing to 'layoff and offshore' retirees. Quick and easy process. That will 'fix' the forecast Social Security and Medicare problems by throwing Americans to the curb.
Of course, there is the American entrepreneurial model that addresses the revenue side - expanding market share, adjusting prices, negotiating costs, etc. Not so quick and not so easy. The Social Security and Medicare problems can be 'fixed' by adding revenue. Add more workers and create jobs that allow the workers to earn more and there will be more revenue. That does not require raising taxes on anyone.
JOBS, JOBS, JOBS not only fixes the economy - it also fixes projected shortfalls and unfunded liabilities. The choices are to 1) cut costs using the quick, easy, and LAZY American business method of whacking the people that depend on the income or 2) work to increase revenue which requires some risk and a lot of work but people that depend on the income will not be hurt as badly.
So do we accept that Americans are an asset and go with the GM approach - not perfect but keeps Americans covered or do we accept that Americans are a liability and go with the Wal-Mart approach - trade with China and throw Americans to the curb?
The first problem is you're looking at the wrong report to find out about how much trouble Medicare and Medicaid are in.
https://www.cms.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2011.pdf
Now, this report is based on a very rosy picture of the doctor payment fix being enacted...and Medicare still will be exhausted by 2024. Without the doc fix...which the report goes on to say:
an almost 30 percent reduction in Medicare payment rates for physician services is assumed to be implemented in 2012 as required under current law, despite the virtual certainty that Congress will override this reduction.
You are incorrect in stating that Medicare D did not have a funding mechanism. It self funds and is adjusted annually, much like Part B. Due to PPACA, both these costs are anticipated to increase dramatically over the next 10 years. You're talking about increasing the cost to people on a fixed income, and according to the OASDI report, not increasing the means of those that will bear the brunt of these added costs.
The Part B and Part D accounts in the SMI trust fund are adequately financed under current law, since premium and general revenue income are reset each year to match expected costs. Such financing, however, would have to increase faster than the economy to match expected expenditure growth under current law.
I do agree that jobs are a key. Unfortunately I'm not hearing anyone in government making any real efforts toward legislation that would bring jobs back here. Until we get control of our trade deficiet and outsourcing, nothing anyone does or says will improve the jobs situation here.
Joe-755363 -- Your link is the same report that I found on the SSA site. The SSA site also provides info on how the short and long range forecasts are modeled. I don't like to point to an autoload link but here it is (NOTE: this link will open a PDF document.)
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/oact/TR/2011/tr2011.pdf
I was aware of the funding mechanism for Part B but missed the Part D mechanism since it is a pass through to private insurance firms. Parts A and B are direct benefits to retirees and SSA administers those plans. Part D is not a direct benefit for retirees. Quoting the information on page 222, "The Part D fund pays private plans to provide prescription drug coverage." That means the Part D prescription plan is administered by private insurance firms - not SSA. SSA does not have direct control over Part D costs or premiums since SSA does not administer the plans.
Your points about Parts B and D only emphasize that health care costs are the problem with Medicare. Cutting outlays will not control healthcare costs. Cutting Medicare costs by cutting benefits may be quick and easy but that also transfers the burden entirely to the private sector. Businesses cut costs the same way by reducing or eliminating worker compensation. That is what 'offshoring' is about. We cannot 'offshore' our retirees, though.
JOBS, JOBS, JOBS are the key. Yes we could try to bring jobs back from offshore. We could try to reinvigorate the buggy whip and 8 track tape player industries, too. If jobs are offshore and not coming back then we need to create new markets, new jobs, new industries. THAT is the American entrepreneurial way to solve the jobs problem. Invest in R&D, help subsidize a portion of the higher risk, increase education and creative thinking through our public ENTERTAINMENT systems (yep, TV programming is an example). Stop trying to think outside the box and realize there is not a box. The future is unlimited and unbounded. The investment banking industry calls that 'creating a market' so we ABSOLUTELY know it can succeed.
The American People will vote these crooked politicians out of office in the next election.
The question becomes, will that be too late!
It is ridiculous and a American Embarassment to watch these bungling political idiots try to function - Both Parties!
The demise of America continues!
MT. Who would we replace them with?
MtMikke-571674,
And who will replace these "political idiots"? Answer: New political idiots!
How about, eliminate political parties.
Zero parties.
No donations, no lobbyists.
Just candidates, issues and positions.
Hopefully, the current batch of political crooks wll be replaced next election, by "reformist" who want to put America on a fiscally responsible course and care little about being a career politician!
It's truely incredible just how *ucking stupid you liberals are
Is this the same Joe that told us the economy has recovered?
xxx
Biden has no spine.
I'm a little confused.
The trillion plus dollars in spending cuts. Does that takes the fiscal deficit down to about zero or is that a zero fiscal deficit and another trillion off the national debt? Is it both or are we just balancing the budget?
Cutting $4 trillion off the national debt in 10-12 years doesn't seem like we're making large cuts per year. A cut in defense spending alone should generate that kind of number in 10 or 12 years.
Groucho,
I believe that is 1 trillion over 10 years or $100 billion a year and an attempt to increase that by 4 over 10-12 years. I’m not positive either but that is what I understand from all the back and forth over the last couple of months.
Even the aggressive Ryan plan doesn’t get us to a balanced budget for over 20 years and the first reduction to the National Debt in 30 years.
so dennis does this mean that obama and companies plan will take over 80 years to have a balanced budget and 120 years to pay off our debt?
Seems that obamas FY 2012 budget proposal he sent to congress earlier this year only included $1.1 trillion in cuts over 10 years. Methinks biden and obama are trying to pull a fast one. Guess we might have to wait till the 4th to see. With all the drama from trying to cut a false $38 billion from the FY2011 budget, biden hopes that 30 days is enough time??
american,
The Biden “Debt Ceiling Plan” is in addition to any future budgets including the FY-2012 budget.
The President’s budget for FY-2012 only takes 10 years longer to balance the budget than Ryan’s. Our Presidents budget will add ≈$8-9 trillion to the debt before the budget is balanced where the Ryan budget will add ≈$6 trillion.
0ne term 0bama doesn't have a budget - that mess he wasted a bunch of tree's on last Feb. was voted down 0-97 and he has talked in platitudes about another budget but you will die holding your breath waiting for him to submit a real budget that cuts spending. He is a Keynesian and that has never worked anywhere - just ask FDR's treasury secretary about how it extended the Great Depression. Nov 6 2012 - the end of an Error - the 0bama error.
I wonder what Biden will have to give up to get the GOP to go along with not crashing the economy (again.)
More tax cuts for Paris Hilton? Maybe the Republicans will go full wingnut and demand the US institute a caste system so that there is formal acknowledgment of the premium status of our Galtian overlords. I think a lot of what motivates the GOP is that people no longer consider rich white men automatically superior to the rest of us.
NISL
It's always GOOD to bring race into it when you can't THINK of anything else to say.
I've never felt the whites were superior to me.
I hope he gives up having the GSEs buy votes for the democrats. Fannie and Freddie were extremely profitable enterprises before the bubble burst. Then they were left holding the bag for around 5 trillion dollars. The world wide derivatives market pretty much collapsed when those two went down. But I guess they were not worried because they had friends in high places. Friends like:
Top 5 Fannie and Freddie campaign contribution recipients
Name Office Party/State Total
1. Dodd, Christopher J S D-CT $133,900
2. Kerry, John S D-MA $111,000
3. Obama, Barack S D-IL $105,849
4. Clinton, Hillary S D-NY $75,550
5. Kanjorski, Paul E H D-PA $65,500
It is hard to argue with liberals who are on the tax payers payroll,when you mention cuts,but wait till there is no more payroll for them and see them squeal like a stuck pig.
It sure is a tough environment to be in government. After thirty plus years of allowing the military industrial gangbang to dig into position the government finds itself without the means to dig them out of the trench. These congressmen must be sweating bullets knowing that they cannot do a thing about controlling the beast within. Until we get a supermajority of populous candidates in office the wolves are going to have congress by the short hairs. There is nothing to be done as we don't even get to vote for anyone but what the wolves have paid their way into visibility.
Alas... but we are done.
James
There is a lot of truth in what you say. That is why there isn't much difference between Bush and Obama.
Sorry Libs.
Per the US Government site US Government Spending.com, our spending breaks down as follows:
Defense 25% of revenue
Health 23% of revenue
Pensions 21% of revenue
Welfare 13% of revenue
Everything else 18% of revenue
So defense and entitlements account for 82% of the budget.
Seems there's no way to make substantial cuts unless you start with the portion of the budget that accounts for 82% of spending. That has to include Medicare and Medicaid.
After paying into a fund for 40 years, how in the hell is it an entitlement.
Republic of Texas #1
An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation.
Social Security and Medicare are entitlements.
nicely defined groucho.
Mt. Who will they replace them with?
If the republicians cave on this, I going to vote for the "Rents to Damn High" party.
Another Presidential Ticket
Liberal dream team
Rumor has it that
Anthony Weiner is going to run for President.
He has chosen Attorney General
Eric Holder as his running mate.
Get your Weiner-Holder bumper stickers
early, before they are all gone.
I understand all the republican candidates have agreed, which ever of them wins the republican primary, they will pick Vitter as a running mate. Family values, don't you know.
Ah but Pat, does not Weiner have a family? Where did his values go?
Oh that's right he only valued lovely co-eds and 17 year old girls.
Yep, it really is a winning argument Pat, do keep bringing it up. K?
Spanky. Lets not forget your "family values" hypocrite Vitter.
So predictable Pat. So it is true, two wrongs make a right?
Fantastic. Let's keep talking about Weiner and his proclivity for dick pics. Family values.
I can't wait to hear from Ms. Dick pic. I'm sure she's ging the Hillary route.
Should be fun, more Weiner stories.
Vitter is all you got - very old news and nothing like Weiner. Look how quickly Boehner had Chris Lee out of there for going without a shirt. Nancy isn't doing a very good job of draining the swamp or Waters and Rangel would be out of jobs. Don't forget William Jefferson (D) LA who had $90K of bribe money in his freezer and commandeered a boat to go get it during Katrina instead of helping people. He finally got booted by the voters and is serving 20 years. No party has a monopoly on sleaziness its just that the Dems are leading the parade right now with 0bama and Holder at the very top.
And, Wiener is being prosecuted by Bonner.
C.O.O.
BONNER? WIENER?
C.O.O. It is Weiner's fellow democrats like Pelosi calling for an investigation, Reid refusing to even attempt to defend him and even the President who says that he would quit if he was in the same situation but it is typical of the mob mentality of the left to blindly follow any of their leaders no matter what.
The congress has created japan ...! bottom line.
Thanks for clearing that up, it has kept me awake at night. Did they cause the tsunami also?
Does the deal involve debt default? That would really reduce our deficit and interest payments.
The deficit for this year is going to be well over a trillion dollars so four trillion over 10 years will still leave us adding at least six trillion to the deficit during that time. Washington really doesn't have a clue at all. Balanced budgets are the only solution that will work. Until someone proposes a balanced budget amendment to the constitution then this debt problem will just keep getting worse and worse and eventually the U.S. will go bankrupt. Eventually other countries aren't going to lend us money anymore and at the same time will decide to collect on the debt that we do owe them, not just the interest payments. So Washington has to stop playing politics here and get to the balanced budget.
That means taxes will have to be raised and there will have to be budget cuts across the board. Yes everything will have to be cut in order for us to solve this problem. Both parties are to blame because neither party is willing to do what's necessary to fix this problem which is to go to a balanced budget. Both parties want to keep their pet projects that get voters to the polls for them. That's why this problem has gotten so out of hand because both parties are to blame. Why the voters continue to allow the people that have created this mess and have allowed it to get worse to keep their jobs is beyond me. Vote them all out and install a new government, one that will actually adhere to balanced budgets.
Well it's a shame almost all the GOP/TP in the House and Senate and the presidential candidates signed that blood oath with Grover Norquist...they would have to kiss some serious lobby money good bye if they ever raised taxes..that also includes any subsidies..appears that their Ayn Rand utopia is right around the corner...
Off topic- Just In
MADISON, Wis. -- The Wisconsin Supreme Court handed Republican Gov. Scott Walker a major victory on Tuesday, ruling that a polarizing union law could take effect that strips most public employees of their collective bargaining rights.
In a 4-3 decision, the court ruled that Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi overstepped her authority when she said Republican lawmakers violated the state's open meetings statutes in the run-up to passage of the legislation and declared the law void.
HOORAY!!!!!!!
Fiesty
Are you kidding? You're back to this talking point?
47% pay NO taxes because they are what's known as the working poor!
Sweetheart, I don't care if they are tea party, commies, Nazis, republicans, independents or democrats - you have to pay something to get all of the stuff out.
Even you must know that!!!
Oh and BTW how did you like the isconsin ruling?? At least Illinois got to get some of the money the dems spent hiding out there.
Also haven't seen your response to Obama coming close to violating the war powers act. Guess there are some things you don't want to 'splain!!!
REB,
"47% pay NO taxes because they are what's known as the working poor!"
47% was for 2009 but for 2010 it is 45% because more people are working. However that is no Federal Income Tax. They still pay the Payroll Tax (SS & Medicare) and all the local, property, state and hidden taxes. I'm also sure you know that the largest leap in those that pay zero Federal Income Tax came with the 2001 tax cuts – Thank You George W. Bush.
Didn't President Obama reduce or eliminate the employee portion of the payroll tax as part of his stimulus plan or other tax cut? Does that make any sense right now? Isn't that going to exacerbate the problem of underfunded Social Security and Medicare?
Candice,
It is a 2% reduction for 2011 tax year only. The impact to SS is there but minor. It is not a reduction to the Medicare portion of Payroll taxes.
Thanks, Dennis.
I figured you'd know and you'd be quicker than Google.
Thanks.
Dennis
The 2% is actually about 33% of the total collected which is about 6% up to $106,000 +.
As for your point about state taxes etc., etc., etc., my feeling still stands. If you want stuff from the Feds you have to pay for it just like you pay the state and what they get is not just SS and Medicare.
REB,
Actually it is 6.4% for empolyees and 6.4% for employers. The 2% was only reduced from the employee part. So it is a net 15.5% cut.
Then why did the Republican Congress in 2001 & 2003 cut all those taxes allowing for the largest increase ever to the number of people that pay zero taxes?
31% of what YOU see.
They gave everybody a cut and more people now take new tax credits and even get more money back. Just a shame.
You guys want to take that back from the 2% higher income earners but keep it for the rest of the 98%. Believe the cost is way out of wack to do that and I would recommend lifting it for all during the current crisis.
I predict no deal. Dems will never cut the freebies for all their voters.
cut government workers down to 1/8 take away there pension and life long medical insurance for them and there family's,close the borders ,and quit trying to police the whole world and see what happens, build in america sell in america,drill in america fill in america,the people have had enough ,almost every post I read tells ne that
WTF. They just had the last week off. Our government is a big JOKE.
god I HATE THIS NEWSVINE CHAT FORMAT!!!! FRIGGING SLOW!!!
serious cuts will need to be made... a declaration of when the deficit will be paid off/in full... the claim of THIS COUNTRY WILL BE DEBT FREE BY THE YEAR XXXX will need to be bolded...
medicare is off the table... at least the seniors that have it already will continue At the same rate, and whatever changes and monies borrowed/used will be from 'this point forward' type of thing... that is seperate what is already comitted to those that are already getting it and will be getting it in the next 15 years.. (open to discussion)
but that also takes out ObamaCare...
if you want to negotiate something big you gotta give something big?
cut all unnessential items/activites first and foremost, then determine what cuts to essential programs need to be made, AFTER the unnessential is cut completely, not partially, that is why they call it UNESSENTIAL
We could balance the budget just by not paying these lazy m fockers for any of the time they are not in session.
you are right mike ,and the hell of it is everyboby knows it,but they have the guns and the right to kill anybody they think might be a threat to them,a hand full of people ruling millions ,sounds a little like Rome to me and Rome burned
Yeah. They piss me off.
With the federal deficit expected to reach 15 trillion by the end of the year, they will still be only scratching the surface in spending cuts. Then again, they are not yet feeding us any exact figures.