E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSUpdated 11:38 a.m. -- House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, will introduce "Plan B" legislation to extend the Bush-era tax rates for those making $1 million and below as a backstop for the "fiscal cliff" talks. But Democrats have rejected the plan, saying that it cannot pass the Senate and does not "ask enough" of top earners.
The proposal, which Boehner described as a less desirable alternative to a larger "balanced" deal with the White House, would mean that rates would go up for the highest earners, while taxes would remain at current levels for the majority of Americans. President Barack Obama had originally called for tax rates to increase at a lower threshold, for those households earning over $250,000 per year; his administration made a new offer to Republicans last night raising that threshold to $400,000.
House Speaker John Boehner and members of his House GOP leadership team hold a briefing to discuss the latest on the fiscal cliff negotiations.
"I continue to have hope that we can reach a broader agreement with the White House that would reduce spending as well as have revenues on the table," Boehner said at a press conference on Capitol Hill. "I think it would be better for our country, but at this point, having a backup plan to make sure that as few American taxpayers are affected by this increase as possible ... is the right course of action for us."
Boehner continued to criticize the president's overall offer as too light on spending cuts. "What we've offered meets the definition of 'balanced,' but the president is not there yet," he said.
White House spokesman Jay Carney said in a statement that Boehner's alternative still "doesn't ask enough" of top earners.
Obama "is not willing to accept a deal that doesn’t ask enough of the very wealthiest in taxes and instead shifts the burden to the middle class and seniors," Carney said. "The Speaker’s “Plan B” approach doesn’t meet this test because it can’t pass the Senate and therefore will not protect middle class families, and does little to address our fiscal challenges with zero spending cuts."
J. Scott Applewhite / AP
Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, arrives for a closed-door meeting with House Republicans as he negotiates with President Obama to avert the fiscal cliff, at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Dec. 18, 2012.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also shot down the House plan as a non-starter, arguing that it cannot pass both chambers of Congress.
"Speaker Boehner's 'plan B' is the farthest thing from a balanced approach," Reid said in a statement. "It will not protect middle class families because it cannot pass both Houses of Congress. The Senate bill is the only 'plan B' that can be signed into law and prevent taxes from rising by $2,200 on the average middle-class family."
Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck retorted that the president's rejection of the alternative plan "defies common sense."
"After spending months saying we must ask for more from millionaires and billionaires, how can they reject a plan that does exactly that?" he said. "By once again moving the goal posts, the President is threatening every American family with higher taxes."
A Republican leadership aide said earlier Tuesday that the second-track plan to prevent tax increases for most Americans does not mean that negotiations between the speaker and the president have stalled. Both sides say that they are hopeful that a larger deal can be struck, and talks continue between the White House and GOP.
But action on the tax cut extension for all but the highest earners would provide a second path to prevent tax increases after the first of the year that could shake the American economy.
Boehner said that the "Plan B" bill is likely to see action on the floor later this week. It will not address the automatic defense cuts - or "sequestration" -- that are part of the larger fiscal cliff puzzle, he said.
Republican leaders are looking at the White House's latest fiscal cliff proposal, which includes a $2.4 trillion dollar deficit reduction package and tax hikes on incomes over $400,000, marking the first time the Obama administration has changed its stance on tax rates. NBC's Chuck Todd reports.
Asked by NBC's Luke Russert about the effect of the Newtown school shootings last week on partisan wrangling over the cliff, Boehner acknowledged the effect the tragedy has had on the American people.
"It's not a time to put Americans through more stress," he said.
NBC's Carrie Dann contributed to this report.
Leave a Comment:
..so it's a counter offer. At least they are talking.
But Mr. Speaker, the President's new offer has moved up the threshold to $400,000 from $250,000 and is a good one, it's time for the GOP to accept.
BTW, the top bracket taxable income should be indexed to account for regional differences.
P.S.: I am talking about ending the Bush tax cuts for those above $400,000 in Obama's plan.
Raising taxes on them is fair...because so far the middle class has made so much sacrifices in getting hurt by the recession caused by super rich bankers who were bailed out by the middle class.
Asked by NBC's Luke Russert about the effect of the Newtown school shootings last week on partisan wrangling over the cliff, Boehner acknowledged the effect the tragedy has had on the American people.
"It's not a time to put Americans through more stress," he said.
=========
Wow. This man is paid $225K a year to be Speaker of the House of Representatives, cries at the reciting of his up and coming from sweeper boy in Dad's pub to Speaker of the House but can only come up with this when talking about one of the deadliest, murdering, terroristic massacres in US History? I'm so done with anything that has a G O P in it.
I see nothing wrong with Boehners proposal, should be strongly considered.
Boehner should be hanged for TREASON. Right now all he is doing is squirming around trying to hold on to his job as Speaker. In effect, he is holding the whole country to ransom so that he can hold on to HIS JOB. What a patriot! What vanity!
I think they should go ahead with this proposal. Hopefully a larger deal can be reached that has some more revenue and a lot of cuts, but I would go ahead with this one as a starting point.
So, if someone has a different idea on how to solve a problem than you, they should be hanged for treason? I hope I don't live in your country...
Pigotry,
Boehner's proposal isn't a counter offer, but instead an interim backup plan in case they don't come to agreement on a balanced approach.
It will be interesting if Reid dismisses the bill out of hand since it there is no downside to the bill. A balance approach can still be agreed upon later.
... for the corporations...and the super rich...it's cheaper to spend some money to buy off GOP elected officials and avoid their proper share of taxes.
... for the GOP...it's a good deal as well, getting more campaign contributions and screwing the rest of the country.
You don't...you probably live in one of the welfared up red states that wants to secede...see ya
I think I'm missing something here...how is increasing the tax rate on those making more than $1 million/year pandering to the corporations and the super rich?
piggy @ 1.8 -- please tell us that you are not so naive as to believe that only republicans are influenced by money.
i believe that this tax increase, if we stay at $250k, will raise around $60B per year.
in november the federal government averaged borrowing $6B per day.
that suggests that all of this fighting over taxing the rich would have covered about 10 days of government over-spending. additionally for the first 6 months of 2012 the government paid about $580M per day of interest on the debt.
it seems that we have a bigger spending problem than a taxing problem
Why does this sound like a used car salesman trying to make a deal?
500,000 and two new tires and it's a deal!
Ron-186..... Boehner and all the others (including 4 Democrats) who signed a pledge to Norquist that supercedes their oaths of office should INDEED be tried for treason - as well as Grover Norquist.
Orange Puss had better cut the strings to his puppet masters and start working for us once and for all !!All this dog and pony show is just to save face. Come Jan. 1st, they can then point fingers at one another . Claiming it is all their fault. Mr. Orange it is long past time for you to lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.
Let me see....what was the message of the voters this past November? Boehner and his conservative clown posse refuse to carry out the will of the people. Enough! Just go off the cliff. We've put up with the economic meltdown created by the last conservative administration and four years of conservative obstructionism, we can recover from the conservatives driving us over the cliff too!
this is the common meme on FR, especially from far left FR posters. Yes they do believe that, and i do believe some of them in here would love to have a secret police for anyone outside of Che's style of thinking. Fortunately most Americans do not view life as rigid as the fringe elements that occupy both parties.
SeekingSanity
ah yes the cry of the unhinged left, everyone who doesnt support the stalinistic style of government must be hung. Seeking is a fan of Pol Pot and Mao Zedong. Do it for the Motherland Comrade Seeking. wear that hammer and sickle proudly
Even America's highest paid CEOs aren't taking home a million + a year in actual straight payroll income. Its all capital gains. If you push it to a million it will hit almost no one. We need to go after capital gains. It won't hit any lower middle class family. It might hit some upper middle class families but even then, i'm in the upper middle class and I would gladly pay more on my capital gains. I think it is disgusting that I am only getting charged %15 on capital gains.
Speaker Boehner, take the deal from the President because that is the best you will get.
We don't want to hang the mentally deficient Seize, just the obvious traitors... You know, the ones that sign oaths other than to their office and their constituencies... The ones that hold the country and its economic progress hostage with fake filibusters... The ones you want to call "having a different idea" because that seems more handy than the truth.
If "a different idea" is loyalty oaths to "other than America" then "different idea" is Treason. If you want to play simple then play simple with THAT.
That's a point I've been trying to make to people for weeks...if you want more tax revenue, the best approach is to change deductions - not the income tax rate. People with means will find ways around the rate if the deductions are not changed (ex: like you pointed out, getting paid via items counted as capital gains instead of ordinary income).
I don't know if the president just doesn't understand the tax code, or if he focuses on rates because it's good politics. Either way, focusing on tax rates is a very ineffective approach if you really want more money.
Boehner's plan B is another attempt to scare the American people into submission. He is trying to hold on as speaker of the House so he has to placate to his constituents and keep the peace with them or lose his job. I like how instead of just Boehner getting up there and speaking to the news, he has 3 or 4 others get up and say the exact same thing as if we hear it from more of them it will be true. Boehner's Plan B is simply more of the same that was voted down by the American people. It is time he wakes up and stops holding us hostage for his own agenda, aka job. President Obama has put for a compromise that i am even willing to live with and I didn't want any compromise with Medicare. Plan B will never pass the Senate and even if it did, it would be vetoed by the President.
BOEHNER, IT IS TIME FOR YOU TO GET SERIOUS AS YOU PUT IT. STOP HOLDING US HOSTAGE.
I want what's best for the country as a whole (all income levels), and I think the best way to do this is reduce the size of government and lower taxes. This does mean less direct government assistance to the poor since I truly believe it builds a dependency that does much more harm than good. I'm guessing my views are significantly different than yours...so, should I be hung?
What are the Obama proposals for spending cuts? That's the other half of the equation! No cuts - no tax increase.
$400,000 sounds about right for the tax cut-off. Maybe 1/2 million. Good to see something is being offered by the GOP that the Dems can look at.
Ron, you didn't bother to read and comprehend chick binder's post. Signing an oath that supercedes your oath to the citizens who elected you is NOT having views that are significantly different than other people's - it IS treason. What part of that do you NOT understand?
chick binder
Then don't forget to include Harry Reid into the equation. He's missed his duty to provide a budget for the previous four years.
I can see $400,000.00, but one Million is "Hogwash" - this John is a Bonehead !!!!
Ron - did you know that children who don't get enough to eat or go to school hungry or have to worry about a place to live overwhelmingly don't do well in school. What you are advocating for is actually making the future generations of this country dumber. Congratulations.
Off topic but a very interesting development being reported by many media sources:
Cerberus Capital Management, a private equity firm that owns a stake in Bushmaster, the gun manufacturer that produced the rifle used in the massacre of students and teachers at an elementary school in Connecticut, announced early Tuesday that it intends to sell that investment.
“We were shocked and deeply saddened by the events that took place at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, CT on December 14, 2012,” the company declared in statement sent out to news outlets. “We cannot comprehend the losses suffered by the families and friends of those killed by the unthinkable crimes committed that day. No words or actions can lessen the enormity of this event or make a dent in the pain that was inflicted on so many.”
Over the past six years, Cerberus has amassed a holding company called the Freedom Group, which has purchased some of the biggest names in American gun manufacturing, including Bushmaster. The firm’s decision to sell off the interests in firearms companies and return the capital to its investors underscores how Friday’s shooting -- which took the lives of 20 children -- has reinvigorated the national debate on gun control, not just for activists, but also for investors.
“It is apparent that the Sandy Hook tragedy was a watershed event that has raised the national debate on gun control to an unprecedented level,” Cerberus asserted in its statement. “As a Firm, we are investors, not statesmen or policy makers. Our role is to make investments on behalf of our clients who are comprised of the pension plans of firemen, teachers, policemen and other municipal workers and unions, endowments, and other institutions and individuals. It is not our role to take positions, or attempt to shape or influence the gun control policy debate. That is the job of our federal and state legislators. There are, however, actions that we as a firm can take.”
According to Bloomberg News, the father of Cerberus chief executive Stephen Feinberg lives in Newtown, Conn. Cerberus said in its statement that it would "immediately" begin the process of selling off the assets of the Freedom Group.
It appears at least ONE group has developed a conscience and integrity!
What are the revenue proposals Boehner keeps talking about, but avoiding saying. Like social security and raising the age on medicare to 67? Boehner gets a free health plan for life paid for by you and I, the elderly don't. Waiting until 67 can be a difference between life and death. Again, Boehner is on the wrong page.
Mr. Speaker - please follow more closely the proposal released by the Simpson-Bowles Commission. This provides difficult to receive taxes and cuts to both sides of the argument. Please hold firm for the large group of us who pay a lot of taxes today. We can pay a little more - IF WE KNOW THAT THE BIG PAYMENTS ARE CURTAILED. Please!
We understand (when I say we - I mean the large number of tax payers who do not spend their day solely focused on this little liberal blog at NBC) the need to raise taxes, but you slow down the unbelievable handouts!
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it the House that provides the budget plan? Senate just votes yes or no on it. President just puts it into law or veto's it. I think I am right on this one. So Harry Reid is not missing any duty at all, because it's not his job to provide a budget.
brenda1964 - well now there you go talking FACTS with notsofunnygirl. She'll NEVER comprehend that!
First it is funny how the right wing wacko's have to post on this site because fox news has turned off their comment section due to all the negative responses to their false reporting or should I say biased reporting of the facts in the news.
That being said, the rich have been sucking off the welfare tit for way too long. They have gotten all the tax breaks, write offs, loop holes, off shore tax breaks, and more. It is time they payed their fare share and you know it. P.s. Trickle down theory SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK. Bush had 8 years of stuff trickling down his leg and nothing but debt happened and loss of jobs. Clinton had higher taxes on the rich and wow, economy was great, jobs where great, and budget was balanced. REPUBLICANS, WAKE UP.
It just seeds like all the GOP does is look for fault and make problems, this party is worthless !!!
hey female trapperkeeper then backdoor dealings for the Obamacare would be considered treasonous since it removed the aspect of debate from the legislation process. Trapperkeeper i suspect in commie land you would be fine with your train of thought or lack thereof
Brenda, speaking of facts, the house proposed a budget, Reid in the senate will not bring it to vote. there we go speaking facts
C'mon people. Anybody making over $250K in income is not struggling in this economy, unless, they have overextended their lifestyle far far beyond their means and so deserve to be struggling. The $400K limit offered by the President is way too generous as far as I am concerned. Tax rates and revenue are at a 60-year low. Where are all those specifics from the GOP on closing loopholes and tax breaks for those at the top. Why does the GOP always come back to those being the itemized deductions that affect the middle class?
The worst thing we could do for the economy is to place a heavier burden on those getting by on SS and Medicare along with those nearing retirement. SS and Medicare need to be off the table. First address the fraud and abuse, establish means testing for recipients for both programs, and raise the income level of the taxation cap to $250K. Consideration should also be given to taxation on the other forms of income mostly available to upper income taxpayers such as carryover credit, estate taxes, offshore accounts, stock awards in lieu of income, etc. Address the breaks and credits that only the wealthy are able to take advantage of - as was promised in the election by both sides.
Voters will be taking names on who sells them out in this debate and the voters will again cast their votes accordingly in 2014 as they did on Nov. 6th.
Umm...... What? Not sure how to respond to this since I have no idea what was just said.
@Seeking
Rick Perry and that whacko Gomert just spoke out on their version of Texas gun control - ensure the teachers are packin'! Yep, both of these good ole boys want to take us back to the wild west of Texas.
Gomert actually said that he wished that those Conneticut teachers woulda had an assault rifle handy to blow that perp away.
Yup, that'll solve the problem.
Plan B from John Boehner has another name: Plan FU.
He really thinks he has come up with a solution.
Why not just pass the bill the Senate has already passed ?
JustSlapMe - Rick Perry proves my point daily - there is NO sanity in the GOP - NONE! These idiots don't have a clue and don't want to understand the problem. They won't be happy until there is a daily shootout on street corners throughout the country. Mental Midgets - that is what the GOP has become!
Liberals are so funny. Beohner offers NANCY PELOSI"S plan and Obama rejects it.
Obama wants to go off the cliff. No doubt. He wants taxes on everyone and then try to blame Republicans.
HEY LIBERALS!!! Beohner caved. Why no deal? Because Obama doesn't want one. This is all Obama's fault.
I never said I'd let anyone go hungry...my basic premise is nobody should be homeless or hungry (unless by personal choice). What I am against is allowing someone to sit at home and collect a check they didn't earn.
If they can't find a real job, then fine - they can work 20 hours/week cleaning up their neighborhood or picking up trash at a local park...something so they can start to build their self-confidence and encourage them to make a better life for themselves. Also, I support paying for rent (including electricity), basic clothing and food, but I'm against additional spending money. If they want a big screen TV, that's great - they need to get a job so they can afford to buy one.
I never said I agreed with any politician signing an oath (or making absolute statements such as Obama threatening to veto any bill that doesn't increase tax rates). In fact, I strongly disagree with those types of actions because I think we should always be open to new ideas.
However, there is a huge difference between disagreeing with something someone does and convicting them of treason and hanging them. It's that concept of treason & hanging politicians that sign an oath (other than the oath of office) that I disagree with.
Cesar Augustus what plan did the house present and what was in it that made the senate not vote on it ?
That number of 400,000 is a good start. But where are the spending cuts, My thougths are simple a bit of everything, and close the departments in washington that are not needed like the department of education, or maybe even the department of energy since these 2 dont do anything at all.
So when Obama spent months and months spewing that he wanted to raise taxes on millionaires and billionaires, he really meant those making 250K. When the House is offering to raise taxes on anyone making a million or more, isn't that exactly what Obama said he wanted all through the campaign? In fact wasn't it something like this from Obama, millionaires and billionaires can afford to pay a little bit more Right or wrong that is what Obama kept saying? But now he was either lying on the campaign trail, or he is moving the goalpost again. Seems hard to believe that when the House offers Obama exactly what he said he wanted for all those months on the campaign trail, that Obama is even interested in a deal when he doesn't take it. Obama should either mean what he says, or say what he means. This appears to be just another campaign lie.
the administration has no reason to bargain, they are in a win win situation; no agreement taxes go up, income for more spending(blame Republicans); agreement administration gets credit, no real spending cuts and trillions in new debt(blame Republicans).
Ron - signing an oath that takes precedent over the oath of office you took, when elected by your constituents IS NOT disagreeing with someone - it IS an act of treason and should be treated as such. This is NOT having a difference of opinion - it is putting their oath to Norquist above the best interests of the country - thus TREASON.
The oath they signed precludes them from EVER raising taxes - no matter what the need of the country. TREASON!
Wow, do you watch the news? He has not caved, he is simply saying more of the same. The one that compromised was President Obama. He went to 400k from 250k for the tax increase. Major compromise. Also he went from 1.6 trillion revenue to 1.2 trillion revenue. Not to mention that he went for 400 billion spending cuts to 600 billion spending cuts. So not sure what you are talking about. Boehner is still on the news strutting his stuff saying that President Obama is getting closer to what he wants but is not quite there. When it should be that Boehner is getting closer to what Obama wants but is not quite there. Remember, OBAMA WON, NOT BOEHNER.
Last time I checked, the oath was to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, not to the American people. This administration has been circumventing the Constitution since day one....they pick and choose which amendments and which "rights" should be protected; they've tried to create "rights" where no such "right" exists (aka, the right to affordable healthcare)....so, who really should we be looking at for treason?
What planet or alternate reality do you live in? He campaigned on 250k through his whole campaign. He spoke of the top 2%. He never said millionaires and billionaires, he said the top 2% making over 250k. Stop spewing right wing agenda talking points that are not true. In fact he compromised on his stance in order to make a deal with the house and is willing to go to 400k. READ THE REAL NEWS AND NOT FOX AND THEN COME OVER HERE TO POST BECAUSE FOX TURNED OFF ITS COMMENT SECTION DUE TO NEGATIVE RESPONSES.
slap -- the two largest consumers of federal government spending are health and social security and neither should be included to getting the government under spending control? how can that be?
thats good you dont know how to respond to it, after all it was directed at the girly folder not you.
Harry Reid.
trea·son
/ˈtri zən/ Show Spelled [tree-zuh n] Show IPA
noun
1.
the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2.
a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3.
the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
sorry seeking, there is no treason with Boehner but continue with beating the drum loudly and proudly. Lenin would be proud
Even with the win win situation, President Obama is willing to negotiate. Now that is the President I voted for. Woot!!
I sure am glad President Obama was re-elected, because these Republicans are after us relentlessly!
I would rather for us to go "over the fiscal cliff" than to give into protectionist Republicans who insist on putting the full burden of the United States Debt on the backs of the poor, the elderly, and the middle class.
Social security would be solvent if the government stopped raping it for other then what it was intended for. Also it would be solvent if the rich actually payed on 100% of its income instead of only the first 125k. I have to pay on 100% of my income, why don't the rich? Another welfare check for the rich.
Wow, I know that it was for girly. What i was saying is that it made no sense.
can't help you there. but enjoy your " Now that is the President I voted for. Woot!!"
you lefties remind me of the followers to James Earl Jones character in Conan the barbarian flick.
This is the Pelosi deal from a year or so back...A democrat idea that was even endorsed by Schumer and it's rejected out of hand by the Empty Suit.
Reid says it has no chance in the Senate....Looks like to me that Reid is holding the middle class hostage now.....
The is no agenda worth consideration other than the Empty Suit's.....He even rejects those ideas of his own party........You have to be proud that you voted for this piece of dung......
Your Empty Suit could care less about you libs or the middle class...just like didn't care about the 4 Americans he let die in Benghazi.....
Well at least he's consistent....
What a peach!!
brenda -- congress in 1983 (republican senate; democrat house) set the cap.
so rich is now defined as anyone making more than $113,700 in 2013? sounds like you want taxes on the middle class to be raised -- send a note to the president with your idea.
It's a funny thing..........
Republicans always cry about America's "long term" Federal deficit when one of their own is exiting the White House whose implemented unfunded Coporate tax cuts with expectations a middle class pay it off, as a Democrat presidential administration comes in.
Yet, in this scenario, the top 2% are now expected to be those carrying the load foy paying down this debt, as the class who solely received those benefits for 12 years. And guess what??? the GOP now decides to offer a "short term" deficit reduction plan for the "long term" deficit they caused......If it was decided the middle class was paying down this deficit the top 2% caused. The GOP would be pushing for "long term" deficit reduction.
These selfish Bast*rds are riduculous............
We need to vote these Coporate Frauds out in 2014..........
For all of you that are whining about Plan B then you need to do a little research. Your beloved Nancy Pelosi proposed that last year. Obama does not want a deal he wants to go over the so called cliff which I think we should. If the small tax increase is going to put you over the edge then you need to cut back on your own expenses, like cell phones, cable TV and eating out
Cliff, Cliff, Cliff, Cliff, Cliiiffffffffffffffffff!
See you at the bottom Bitch McConnell and SunDunce Boehner!
jwilson - Republicans and anyone else who signed a pledge to Grover Norquist should be tried for TREASON! Boehner and all those who signed such a pledge put that pledge over their oaths of office to protect our country. It is very simple and those who don't understand it just don't want to!
@Ron1861300
"I want what's best for the country as a whole (all income levels), and I think the best way to do this is reduce the size of government and lower taxes. This does mean less direct government assistance to the poor since I truly believe it builds a dependency that does much more harm than good. I'm guessing my views are significantly different than yours...so, should I be hung?"
Let's start with Corporate Welfare, the tax payers should not subsidizing your business when there are billions and trillions of dollars in profits sitting on your balance sheets. You believe in the "Free Market" or "Capitalism", it's your responsibility as a business owner to keep up with the market not the tax payers and you need to know how to adjust accordingly. The tax payers most definitely should not be subsidizing or providing your business with considerable tax breaks when your business is creating more jobs through outsourcing then with insourcing. We most definitely need to close all off shore tax havens i.e. Cayman Islands, etc.
How about the Military Industrial Complex? This most definitely need to be cut, we need to start cutting out a lot of those contractors, however I can hear the screaming now you are cutting jobs. According to a lot of people on the right the government doesn't create jobs so this shouldn't affect any jobs. Besides a lot of those jobs the military can do it a lot more cost effective by paying the soldiers to do it. For that same job the government will pay a soldier roughly $40,000 to $50,000 but that contractor will make $80,000 and up through the government. It's time to cut a lot of those contractors out they are milking the government besides the soldiers can do a better job versus some of these contractors. Do we need to be reminded of Haliburton and the elecution of soldiers in the shower?
We also need to cut the funding on the new Iraq Embassy, why was that Embassy needed and built in the first place? The construction began in 2005 and was completed by 2008 at a cost to the American tax payers a cool $592 million dollars to build it and it is costing this country $1.8 billion dollars a year to maintain it. How was that budgeted for?
What do you want cut? Be specific.
Let's name a few:
1) The Food and Drug Administration?
2) Department of Transportation? (You are aware they are responsible for the maintenance of the roads and bridges? Doesn't matter if it's state or federal)
3) The Police Department? (they are government as well)
4) The Fire Department? (They are government as well)
4) Department of Defense?
5) Military?
Just asking?
SeekingSanity, I guess anyone who, by exercising their rights/responsibilities as outlined in the Constitution, opposes the king should be tried for treason, by your logic. You and Harry Belafonte should go away to a deserted island together and sip on coconut milk! Like minded idiots deserve each other!
Barry would just as soon drive us off the cliff..... he gets EVERYTHING HE WANTS.... higher taxes & cuts in military spending..... And he'd get to BLAME the Republicans for the mess..................
Why would he choose to compromise?
Plan 9 wouild be more like it.
jwilson - you totally understand what I am saying and choose to make it something else. Perfect little Republican - refuse to admit you're wrong!
@GC-399977,
You raise some good points in 1.66. As to what I'd cut, in general I prefer to set percentages and have the people in charge of the affected departments figure out the best way to implement the cuts. This is part of my basic belief that "those closest to the problem know best how to fix it".
So, going with this approach, over the next 10 years, I advocate a 20% reduction in discretionary spending, 30 to 50% reduction in defense spending (this partially depends on treaty negotiations about foreign bases), and at least a 10% reduction in all other federal outlays.
I would also do a needs assessment of all agencies to determine if any of them can be cut further, or potentially eliminated. In particular, I'd take a hard look at all of the unfunded mandates and see if some (most?) of them can be eliminated to reduce the tax burden at the state and local levels.
One big change I would make is replacing the Dept. of Education with an advisory panel. I fully support higher education, but I think most education decisions should be made at the state/local level - not at the federal level. But - I do see a place for an advisory panel at the federal level that can assist local governments as needed - and point out to congress cases of gross negligence.
@BB,
SS can easily be made solvent with minor tweeks and is not part of the equation regarding the deficit. Healthcare costs are the main issue regarding Medicare. Due to the ACA, Medicare is now on better footing - per the trustees of Medicare, and the ACA provided savings that were used to maintain benefits down the road. Raise the SS and Medicare income taxation caps first and means test both programs for recipients. Until then, no benefit cuts or raising of age limits. Time to cut wasteful defense spending first.
No jwilson not anyone who disagrees. Just anyone who signed an oath to an unelected lobbyist that supercedes their oath of office. It is very simple. You just don't want to understand it.
funny, i was just thinking the same about the right wing wacko's that will follow rush and fox news right off the cliff. Kinda like those field mice that run off the cliff in droves only because one of them went first.
No, doesn't sound anything like that. Should have your hearing checked. I am for increasing the taxes on the rich since they get all these tax breaks that the middle class do not get. I think they should close those tax loop holes and make the rich pay as we do.
brenda1964
Obviously brenda1964 the planet that actually pays attention to what politicians say. Here is a direct quote followed by the link.
"President Obama cut taxes for every American worker and provided 18 tax cuts for small businesses to help them weather the recession. Now, he’s calling on millionaires and billionaires to pay a little bit more so that we can pay down our debt in a balanced way."
Now the links http://www.barackobama.com/ISSUES/
Whoa brenda1964 low and behold it is Obama's very own website that is touting what you seemed to have missed. Take a look under the taxes tab. There are also plenty of examples of this exact words all over the mainstream media, but of course what could possibly have more impact then his own website?
brenda1964
House provided a budget, sent it to the Senate. Harry tabled it four years in a row, rather than amending the House plan and voting on it.
@ Seeking, yeah girl, your Duke education places you above others with your vile comments. Get a life girl.
Brenda - Compromise is not when 1 person caves in completely to the other side. Beohner has caved. Offered up NANCY PELOSI'S plan and Obama shot it down. Obama's refusing to cut anything realistic. He wants cuts 10 years in the future when some OTHER president would have to deal with it. AKA...kicking the can down the road.
Bottomline is...GOP is caving and Obama is not trying to solve the issue. He wants to spend spend spend until he can not be president anymore and then it's someone elses problem.
And, your social security statement is wrong because the rich's payout is capped as well. It's not solvent because it was designed for people to die and govt to get money and now that people are having less kids, you have less people paying in than those that are about to collect from it.
Don't know what all the whining is from the left... Those "evil" Koch brothers will have to pay...you want to make the rest of America suffer too? Obama is like a dog with a bone...the big earners will get hit with the unfair increase and pay more of the lion's share of those that don't pay their share, but Obama wants more and more... C'mon Barry...the balls in your court...take the $1mm and run.
SEE, Boehner's going to try to slip in his tax increase and his cuts to the elderly while everyone is paying attention to the gun control issue.
Unlike most Republican's, intelligent people can think about more than one thing at a time.
Get rid of the guns, raise the taxes on those earning over $250,000 and don't cut Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security.
Sure dirp,
And not talk about ANY spending cuts, right? People on the left live in dreamland if they think that solves everything by raising the tax rate on those "rich" folks... You really are dreaming!!
Per MSNBC, Obama is seeking $1.2 TRILLION in tax increases. Essentially, just tax away to match the spending. No cuts. No compromise. No doing what is right for the American people.
This is all Obama's fault 100%. GOP has caved. Obama's holding up the deal and lying to the American people.
Unfortunately....Liberals will believe every word.
How dense can you be Bonehead Boehner? the amount is $250,000 and up not $1,000,000 and up. Why oh why do the republicans keep protecting only the rich?
clwyd,
Why is Obama like a dog with a bone about those $250k earners? WHY isn't he talking about spending CUTS? WHY do you liberals always want MORE money but yet can't talk cuts? You have obviously been sniffing some glue...
If I was those Fix The Debt CEO's, I'd make a call to the minority and majority leaders in Congress and the President - telling them that the first party to introduce the Simpson - Bowles proposal (completely in tact - no changes) into both houses and get their members to vote for it, will receive all the PAC money from their corporations for the next 4 years. The other party is immediately cut off.
Here's what I don't understand, The majority of Americans agree with the President's plan otherwise he wouldn't have been re-elected. So why are the republicans still playing hard ball trying to prove their point to Grover Norquist? More and more republicans are running away from their "pledge" in order to get a deal done. You don't hear anything from REAL job creators or CEO's that the President talked to 2 weeks ago, why, because they have a better understanding of what the President is doing.
For those that obviously didn't get the memo, the President's plan CLEARLY lays out what cuts he would make and some of them are entitlement programs that Democrats love. The Republican plan STILL doesn't state which "cuts" they would like to make. Why the secrecy? If they were serious in addressing cuts then why not say which ones they want to make? All they say is close some loopholes and entitlement programs. It's more of the same "agree and we'll address them later........maybe." The Democrats do the same thing but this time they are also in a ringer because it's the President proposing them.
The good thing is the President moved from his consistent stance of $250k to $400k, I'm sure he didn't want to but he did in order to get a deal done but Boehner AGAIN is thinking that "The longer I drag this out the more the President will blink." or maybe he is trying to "save his job", only he knows but I have a News Flash; The President is not going to blink because he has nothing to lose and everything to gain. He has the majority of the country behind him, he has Republicans slowly moving over to his side AND the REAL job creators are backing him so why not do what's best for the country and NOT the lobbyist????
Pigotry wrote: "P.S.: I am talking about ending the Bush tax cuts for those above $400,000 in Obama's plan. Raising taxes on them is fair...because so far the middle class has made so much sacrifices in getting hurt by the recession caused by super rich bankers who were bailed out by the middle class (sic)."
Sorry, but the recession you're referring to was created by two Liberal Democrats, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank with the blessing of their Democratic brethren in the House of Representatives in 2007, after the Democrats returned to power in Congress.
Dodd and Frank were behind the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac foreclosures in 2008 that lead to bank failures, the super rich bankers you're blaming is a figment of your biased Liberal/Democrat imagination (Richard W. Rahn:What Caused the Financial Crisis, November 16, 2010). "Government policies (including actions by the Fed), not greedy bankers, caused the financial meltdown"(ibid).
Over a five year period, Former President Bush tried to get congress to act on the problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In February, 2004 in his FY05 Budget to congress, Bush stated:
The risk posed by the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital, and called for creation of a new, world-class regulator: “The Administration has determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore…should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator”(2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83).
So, Ms. Pigotry, if you'd like to read more about what really happened re: the bank failure and the recession that it caused, instead of the lies and propaganda that you've been fed, just let me know. I'll be happy to give you the web addresses so you can read for yourself.
Common Sense,
Exactly where SPECIFICALLY is Obama is cutting entitlements? The good thing is that Boehner is actually the reasonable party in this debate. Why Obama having a tizzy about those making $400K to $1MM? Those evil "Koch" will already be paying more, so why still hounding on those between $400K and $1MM? Why doesn't Obama talk about real cuts to spending? Why the secrecy?
Common Sense:
You’re confused by your own misunderstanding of the situation.
The majority of Americans don’t agree with Obama’s plan. In other MSNBC articles it was stated that approx. 62% of Americans want the President and congress to work together to get something done to help fix our economic mess. There is no popular consensus supporting the Obama economic recovery plan.
The Republican Party still represent a sizable block of the American electorate, approx. 48%; therefore, they have a moral obligation to speak for that national constituency.
You clearly have a number of things wrong with your comments. To begin with, to the best of my knowledge, no Republican has a point to prove TO Grover Norquist. If you have any proof that a particular Republican does, then please identify that Republican, and explain the point that he or she is trying to prove?
Next, you wrote: “More and more republicans are running away from their "pledge" in order to get a deal done.” You seem willing to use straw man arguments, instead of just stating your case. If you have to go to extremes to make a statement, then it looks like you’re either hiding something or you’re trying to misdirect the readers attention away from your weakness. This kind of writing damages your credibility. Begging the question after using straw man arguments destroys your credibility completely.
You wrote: “You don't hear anything from REAL job creators or CEO's that the President talked to 2 weeks ago, why, because they have a better understanding of what the President is doing.” Here, you’re assuming that job creators or CEOs have a better understanding of what is needed to boost the economy then the Republicans that you were badmouthing for no apparent reason. You have no proof, what so ever that job creators or CEOs agree with Obama’s policies, because very little has been written about those meetings. Generally, when a meeting of senior American business executives with the president gets little or no press, it means that the meeting did not go the president’s way, i.e., he does not have their support.
You wrote: “For those that obviously didn't get the memo, the President's plan CLEARLY lays out what cuts he would make and some of them are entitlement programs that Democrats love.” Well, judging by the amount of self-importance in your statement, perhaps you could outline the president’s plan for the readers, in its entirety.
You also wrote: “The Republican plan STILL doesn't state which "cuts" they would like to make. Why the secrecy? If they were serious in addressing cuts then why not say which ones they want to make?” Apparently, you didn’t get the memo either. Last week, Obama and Speaker of the House, Boehner agreed to keep a lid on the details of their on-going talks, so all you’re getting from the press is generalities.
Common Sense, here’s a News Flash for you: Your screen name is misleading, because you don’t have a clue. Unless you’re clairvoyant, you have no idea what Speaker Boehner is thinking, and to tell the readers that you do, only serves notice that your thinking is suspect. The idea that, “the more the President will blink,” is absurd. In a face-to-face confrontation, one adversary will only blink once. There is no multiple blinking going on. Clearly, you are unfamiliar with that axiom. Have you been in America long?
This is a budget negotiation between two politicians; it is not a knife fight between Jim Bowie and Antonio de Santa Anna; there is no blinking, or backing down. No one will be cut or stabbed. Its two men trying to find the common ground between their political ideologies, and translate it to a budget deal; no more, no less. Now, if you want drama, call my ex-wife.
JK,
Because Obama knows what the majority of Americans voted for and want for Middle america. Not only what that the republicans want for the top 2% of america. Bonehead Boehner is the worst House Speaker n my lifetime. I'm almost 68! I've already lived through the worst President Ever, bush! The guy hiding on his ranch in Texas for the past 4+ years. surrounded by his loyal right wing Perry drones protecting him from the Hague's World Court Warrant for his arrest for War Crimes!
clwyd - Oh how sad that you have fallen so hard for the liberal brainwashing. Do you know how Clinton got "surpluses"? He taxed you middle classers. George Bush lowered tax rates on the middle class and set the limits to where they are now.
Obama has increased your taxes through Obamacare. Obama is about to let the payroll tax to increase by 2%. Therefore, Obama is going to increase middle class taxes anyway.
You liberals need to pay attention to the shell game. While he's raising it on the rich and you liberals are celebrating "sticking it to the man", the middle class is going to get shafted as well. Get ready for it.
Heh, and agreement with democrats to increase taxes right away, but put off spending cuts until later. Haven't the republicans learned by now that the democrats will NOT put through any meaningful spending cuts EVER??
They automatically target military for cuts, and continually grow entitlements and welfare.
Thank you Paws,
I couldn't have said it any better myself!
Paw and JK,
I was a Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan republican, but after being brainwashed as a Young Republican began to think and not listen to the extreme right that has now made those three republicans sound like Liberals by the extreme turn to the right!
Oh, We voted for Obama not the republicans and loony tune Mitt. The military should be cut in 1/2 or more and the $4,000,000,000,000 wasted on two lost bush wars be remembered for what they were. Along with the 7,200 body bags!
Paws, that $1.2 T in tax cuts is over 10 yrs...it's actually only $120B per year. Deficit per year is $1.2 T...must be the new math that our so-called educators are teaching if $120B per year gets our $1.2T per year deficit under control. How does King Barry reduce the now $1.1T per year deficit (after factoring in the new revenue)?
clwyd,
I see now that you have gone to the other end of the spectrum and have been brainwashed by the liberal left. Last I checked, Obama still has troops in Afghnistan, those soldiers dying over there are HIS responsibility. Also realize that we have lost more people in Afghanistan under Obama than in the previous two terms of Bush. Sure...go ahead and try to cut defense spending...why do you think the Democrats aren't talking about that issue? Why?? Let's see...largest defense contractors are in Democratic states (i.e., California). And should ever care to read anything more than your liberal cartoons, you would also see that America still voted for a Republican led House...what does THAT tell you? While Obama won the slight majority in this electon that certainly (contrary to this liberal website) didn't give him a MANDATE to dictate to the other side of America only his vision of America. Boehner has offered up now two different proposals, plus also has a backup plan. Where is Obama in the discussion? People would be well advised that if Obama would veto Boehner's backup plan he is giving the green light to those evil "millionaires".
OHHHH the Drama!
All this speculation while the $64K question remains unanswered and that is does Otis have enough votes from his obstructionist caucus to PASS anything?
Again, why are they only targeting the "social safety nets" and NOT defense spending?
You want to get serious about deficit reduction, that would be the place to start!
We could finish with unnecessary subsidies and corporate welfare!
Plan Boner...or Plan B ... is sticking it to the middle class by forcing the middle class to shoulder more burden. Unfair.
The Speaker and his GOP want to do everything to help the top 1%, so these top 1% would save the money to have more to contribute to Republicans' campaigns, starting with Midterm 2014 Congressional elections.
Feisty,
I agree with you on the need for serious defense spending cuts. Unfortunately, I don't hear the leadership in either talking about this.
And how does this proposal for Plan B stick it to the middle class? Based on the proposal, it only increases taxes on income over $1 million.
Very good point. I wish people would stop being so partisan and start evaluating individual ideas based on their merits - not the party of the person that suggested the idea.
Hey, armurray who writes:
Well, there fewer people above %1 million income than people with income above $400,000. Boner's plan would have few people pay higher taxes. Less revenues from the super rich, then more burden on the middle class.
.
Hurting the middle class is no smart, I want to tell the GOP. Because the middle class is the backbone of this great country. The middle class work, pay taxes, and pay mortgages. Government has info of their paychecks, they can't hide wealth as the super rich have done. behave to stay on their jobs - good for the country, good for social order. They are not super rich enough to buy so many high-power weapons as Adam's family did (Adam Lanza, that is).
They middle class also have to behave to stay on their jobs - good for the country, good for social order. They are not super rich enough to buy so many high-powered weapons as the Adam's family did (family of Adam Lanza, that is).
.
This is Correction to #2.5 because time ran out on me
Only 26 more letters in the alphabet before the Congressman gets it right and comes back to plan 'A' - the President's plan.
Salud
Certainly the military budget can take the hit, I read that the Air Force finally pulled the plug on an IT project after spending a billion (with a B) on it and getting nothing. They estimated it would take another 1.1 billion to implement just a 1/4 of the initial proposal. I wish I had a billion to just pi$$ away.
Because defense spending is an actual constitutional function of the United States government, whereas welfare isn't. Did you ever learn anything in your government-union education?
Your Pigness, I don't understand how it burdens the middle class more when their taxes won't be touched?
S'plain
LucyPigotry.right on! cola on SS barely covers medicare increase and this is not a game winner, especially not for the dems. tax increase on every thing above 250k, raise cap on SS to 250k. once those slimeballs get their hands into SS they will never stop! how about the gov repay all the SS money they have borrowed?
look at europe and the poverty they have caused by attacking retirerment and public pension plans, what are they thinking?
Colorado-Man - wow - got your shot in at the union didn't ya? Do you feel better now? See, even the Pentagon says they don't need a great deal of the budget that is being alloted to them - we have weapons built that are sitting and have no use - to anyone. And yet, you have a problem with that?
However, you are more than willing to let those less fortunate who have been hit hardest by the recession starve. How magnanimous of you!
The government run union educational system doesn't really get too much into that. It's kind of a scary subject. They would rather teach the proper way to use condoms.
If this was Reagan or "W" the GOP would give them anything they want, this is Nuts !!!
The projections for 2013 spending for defense is around 0.9 Trillion, for Pensions 1.1 Trillion, Health care 1.2 trillion, Education 0.8 trillion, Welfare 0.6 Trillion. Would you not agree that everyone needs to take a hard look at spending cuts?
Colorado-Man
Wrong!!!
Courtesy of Wikipedia:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
So Colorado-Man, the question really is where did you get your education?
Rush Limbaugh?
Faux?
Must really suck finding out that the U.S. Constitution is in fact one of the most Progressive-leaning documents in the history of the world instead of the swill Rush and Faux have been pushing on you.
Salud
The GOP only want spending cuts when the Dem's are running the show, the only party that have a good record of controlling the debt are the Dem's !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The truth of the matter is our country spends too much
November spending -
Revenue per day - 5 Billion
Spending per day - 11 Billion
The breakdown on spending -
The Department of Health and Human Services, $3 billion a day
Social Security, $2.5 billion a day
Department of Defense, $1.8 billion daily tab
Interest on the debt, $854 million every day.
Celtic 1
Everyone?
Ronald Reagan didn’t.
George H.W. Bush didn’t
Newt Gingrich didn’t
George W. Bush didn’t
John Boehner didn’t.
Only when a Democrat is in office, the Republican Media machine, like Faux, Rush, and the rest of the Fascists idiots perpetrate a false talking point that Democrats tax and spend.
Only gullible sheeple believe the talking point.
Salud
TomasGrande,
Actually, Bush 1 did implement defense spending cuts after the end of the cold war.
I do agree the Republicans were fiscally irresponsible from 2000 to 2006. I think this is largely because many of the Reps that won office in the 1994 elections had left by 2000 (many voluntarily term-limited themselves...like they said they would do when they ran). So, by 2000 it was back to career politicians, and they always spend like drunken sailors.
TomasGrande (or as you are known in Colorado, Big Tom from Mexico) - "Promoting Welfare" is not the same as sending people that are unwilling to work, money. Did you notice that the US has always had armed forces but hasn't always had welfare payments? Does that clarify what the Constitution intends? But you are awesome with Wikipedia.
I didn't realize that the welfare system was just begun under George W. Bush, the source of all things recessionary, according to you and Feisty. Your attempt at trying to transfer guilt to me doesn't reduce the truth of my post to the Deadhead.
TO: armurray who wrote:
That's what President Obama is there for, to make sure they DON'T "stick it to" the poor, the elderly, or the middle class.
I am so thankful that President Obama was re-elected.
Colorado - you posted no truth - just your continued nonsense.
TO: Ron-1861300 who wrote:
Agreed. I've said it before and I'll say it again, Boehner had a couple of ideas I liked.
One suggestion he had was to limit tax deductions on incomes over a certain amount, and the 2nd was increasing taxes on those making over $1 million (as opposed to $250,000).
I think that raising taxes on those making $250,000 a year was a bit too low, but I also felt that President Obama was using that figure as a beginning bargaining point and that he always expected to go up from there.
And again the Pig talks about the boner! Goodness girl, is it that hard for you to get a boinking?
So Obama is after those "evil" folks making between $250K and a $1MM? WOW...he wants to squeeze everything out of everybody...
American Girl-724855,
So if you raise taxes on somebody making $1 million dollars exactly, how is that hurting a family that makes $125 thousand a year?
It makes no difference to that family.
@armurray#2.28: It indeed hurts that family. An appropriate progressive tax system is the best practical, and psychological governmental policy to insure equitable earning power, along with fair wealth distribution for all American Workers. Additionally, such a policy is a major equalizer for maintaining national currency and wealth balance relative to GDP.
Everyone?
@Charlie-1915998#2.30: Quite agree with you "Charlie". The nations most pressing need is "full employment". Relative to the health and well being of the nation, all things are contingent upon this. The sole entity that can bring this about is the Federal Government through various spending. Once accomplished, we are capable of getting our financial house in order. *"Your spending is my income." "My income is your spending".
*Paul Krugman
Addendum: Messed that up. "My spending is your income". "Your spending is my income". A "Paul Krugman" quote. Often, I'm quite the dunce. Sorry about that.
Pigotry wrote: “Plan Boner...or Plan B ... is sticking it to the middle class by forcing the middle class to shoulder more burden. Unfair. The Speaker and his GOP want to do everything to help the top 1%, so these top 1% would save the money to have more to contribute to Republicans' campaigns, starting with Midterm 2014 Congressional elections.” Could you please provide some details that would show how Speaker Boehner’s plans, either of them, would stick it to the middle class?
Ms. Pigotry, can you tell the readers who gave you the information re: what the top 1% would do with the money they saved by Boehner’s actions?
Funnygirl, she looks like a sweathog. Who wants to boink a sweathog?
Try reading Feisty Redhead's claptrap, and then figure out what her love life must be like........hahahaha.
She "begs the question" and builds "straw man" arguments, and appeals to "fallacies." I'd like to be a fly on a wall, with a video camera in that room.....LOL.
Tomas Grande:
Clearly, you don't know the difference between the federal government promoting the general Welfare of the American people, and the federal government providing Americans with welfare subsistence.
Salud on that for a while.
With the President's proposal to shake down those earning $250K, the estimated amount of revenue was something like $56B in 2013. I beleive that would pay approximately 1/10 of the annual interest on $13T debt. So now the Speaker wants to raise it to those who make over $1M. Uh, how much revenue would that generate? Anyone care to guess?
And the Speaker wants to cut govt. spending, but has he ever indicated where it is that the govt has squandered funds? Food Stamps? Well, yes, the govt. has issued more food stamps than before, but given he state of the economy that's not exactly surprising. But how much has this cost? How about entitlements? Again, yes. But again, the the feds have lost revenue and there are many more aged people collecting. Thses conditions would be the same no matter who is in the White House.
I can guarantee that there will be more federal spending - on things that were unplanned. Such as cleaning up New York and New Jersey after Sandy. When disasters hit, the govt. declares disaster areas in order to provide funds/loans for those affected.
For a change, I like just one right winger list where fed $$ have been squandered by Obama, how much has been spent and what percentage of the national debt that represents.
That's what President Obama is there for, to make sure they DON'T "stick it to" the poor, the elderly, or the middle class.
obama has already shafted the middle class with ACA as our insurance costs rise. We'll get shafted by taxes next year by him also.
@Fiesty: Boehner = Otis; good one ... does that make Cantor = Barney Fife and McConnell = Floyd? No wonder none of these "plans" make sense - they are more like bad comedy scripts. I hope Sheriff Taylor can save the day before Mayberry goes bankrupt.
Well, how do you expect the government to raise more revenue? The federal debt is $13T - that' 13,000 Billions! Annual interest alone is over $300B. How are you going to close the gap? Cutting spending alone won't do it - you could shut the government down completely tomorrow and the debt will continue to rise.
Nobody wants to admit it, but any meaningful solution will require shaking down everybody.
@Gumps,
I know and I agree with you. All I was saying is that obama isn't out to save the middle class like he keeps bragging. It would be nice if he would at least be honest about it. That and this whole 'keep entitlements off the table' is lies too. Taxing the rich and cutting the military won't get us anywhere. Everybody is going to have to take a cut.
But the libs won't admit it, all they keep saying is tax the rich, tax the rich. Foodstamps, to Medicare/Medicaid, to the military, to the middle class, to foreign aid are going to have to be hit.
The libs might not like the proposals that the right is putting force, but at least someone is admitting that more needs to be done besides tax the rich.
The right tried to put forth cutting proposals, the left turned them down, so the right is going with the tax increases and putting it all in the lefts' lap right where it belongs. This way this administration will HAVE to own the coming financial problems.
@Alex, don't go on about "the libs" - both sides are pandering to their constituents and neither has a solution that will address the problem of the deficit. There's a reason for this: Any meaningful remedial action will require wholesale pain to be born by everyone - old, young, rich and poor. Nobody wants to hear this but the reality won't go away just because it's not palatable; it is oh so much more satisfying to lambaste the other side. While both sides continue to play partisan politics, we will continue to see volitility in the stock market with depressed IRA/401K valuations.
I disagree with Speaker's plan B
That makes me feel better. With the intelligence of your quotes on here I am now sure it must be wrong!
B=Bull, the GOP are acting like Hogs !!!!!!!!!!!!!
GOP are hogs? No I refuse to agree. Oink.
Pigs are smart...oink..oink
GOP's boehner and his fellows? not smart. oink oink oink
Our bloated defense budget needs to be on the table. We are paying billions on weapons that the pentagon says they don't need. We are still equipped with very expensive weaponry designed for a cold war that is long since over. We have fighter jets that are so expensive that they have never been used in combat for the fear of losing one of them.
The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program is estimated to cost $1.5 TRILLION. Where is that money supposed to come from?
It is time to get real.
We can borrow for killing machines but not for our children...thank the repugnants for this jewel of 18th century thought...
Rick & Williard,
I agree on the need for real defense cuts, but unfortunately I don't hear the leadership in either party calling for this. There are individual reps in both parties calling for cuts, but the leadership seems to be set on keeping current spending levels.
J. Willard, kind of mind boggling isn't it?
The nation as a whole has been asking for huge cuts to defense, so it's not like this is any surprise for the president or Congress.
I like to know what are all these high-priced fighter planes being used right now. Where are they stationed? How are they being used? How much is needed to maintain each? It's really criminal to refuse to cut some of these, which are toys to many of the military brass, but to insist on turning many of the needy out on the streets or leaving many without heat in the winter cold.
Only cuts the republicans want are those that effect the poor and seniors. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, and unemployment benefits, which actually, when combined, are only a drop in the Federal fiscal bucket. They won't go along with any stimulus for job creation. They won't touch the waste in defense spending. They damn sure won't cut corporate welfare. They do want the tax code changed to disallow deductions for mortgage interest, which directly will be another burden on poor and working people. Again, whom do these republicans represent? Hold your ground Mr. President. Better we all tumble over that now, infamous cliff. Do not give an inch to these sons-ah-bitches.
Mac,
SS, Medicare and Medicaid are the majority of the federal budget, and that % is expected to increase significantly over time...hardly a drop in the bucket.
We already spend around $1 Trillion more each year than we pay in taxes...how much deficit stimulus spending do we need?
I agree on defense spending, but unfortunately neither party is talking about reducing it.
The presidents commission also recommended ending most deductions - including the mortgage interest deduction. This was a bipartisan commission. I agree paying for what we get from the government will suck for everyone, but we can't keep borrowing 40 cents on every dollar we spend...that is not remotely sustainable.
If we go over the cliff, do you realize the middle class will be hit the hardest? Personally, I think we should go over it - the Bush tax cuts were a huge mistake because they got the middle class accustomed to an unsustainable tax rate. The reality is, everyone needs to pay more or we need very significant cuts to government services (including defense and entitlements).
"If we go over the cliff, do you realize the middle class will be hit the hardest?" -- I don't think so. It's the military (more precisely the defense industry) that would be hit the hardest! And that's why BOTH sides don't really want to go there , even though, as defenders of the rich and powerful, the GOPs would be harder pressed to avoid those automatic cuts in military spending.
Americans should insist on making cuts in military spending and using the saved money to update the country's infrastructure - you know the crumbling infrastructure that the rich built! That way, no jobs would be left as a result of the cuts. But good luck on that happening.
Stupid Obama thinks he's robin hood, and taxing the rich is going to save the economy- what a buffoon. Too many system suckers created by the left who like to dole out money to feel benevolent, but just enough money to keep them at the trough. Off the cliff we go- EVERYBODY pay their fair share. By the way, you wanna talk fair? I have worked for over 40 years but there are over 4 million on welfare doing nothing- now THAT'S not fair!
http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/american-welfare-state-how-we-spend-nearly-$1-trillion-year-fighting-poverty-fail?gclid=CNOaycO7pLQCFad_QgodqG0AvQ
In the conversation regarding military cuts and who pretends not to hear the voice of the american people as a whole regarding them it's important to note that the hardware end is an international currency of sorts... Not all of our military production is for the good 'ol USA. We win friends and influence people with this stuff... And then hopefully don't get it pointed back at us.
In this country, military production is tied way more closely to greed than it is to need.
NASA, in cooperation with the KKK, has developed the first known crystal that doesn't catch or reflect light... And she just posted right above me.
You sure have a sense of entitlement after "I have worked for over 40 years". I bet you believe you built the country's infrastructures all by yourself. Do you know that most of the "system suckers" also worked for 40 years also? Don't know if you're one of them because many of the 47% - system suckers - don't even realize they're among them.
"Too many system suckers created by the left who like to dole out money to feel benevolent, but just enough money to keep them at the trough.." -- But you think the GOPs won't just be as happy to dole "just enough money to keep them (the poor) at the trough"? You think they really want social unrest (aka revolution)? They complain about what the Democrats do but they really want to do the same thing just with less humility leaving the recipients with less dignity.
"...They complain about what the Democrats do but they really want to do the same thing just with less humility leaving the recipients with less dignity..." - And they want their own cronies, CEOs of the health industry, defense industries, etc., to do the doling out so they can get a piece of the pie in the process.
"the first known crystal that doesn't catch or reflect light"...
... Chick, that is bloody priceless! Har!
Crystal - your ignorance is beyond belief. The "system suckers" as you moronically refer to them are seniors - who have paid into the system all their lives; veterans who have defended our country and the sorry likes of you and have paid their taxes; the working poor who pay taxes - just not Federal Taxes - and often work two jobs just to have food on the table and a roof over your head.
Your filthy stuidity is only overshadowed by your ignorant desire to shout it at the top of your disgusting lungs!
chick - well said!
The one who likes binding chicks is just too clever-NOT. Must be the only way you can get a captive audience.
cronies of the GOP -- CEO's and corporations??? Really???? Those cronies donate to BOTH sides of the isle and your pal O is taking THEIR $$$$ for his inaugaral party!!! ALong with the union $$$$. You do know that O's biggest "bundler" is John Corzine who BILKED over a BILLION dollars from the corporation hedgefund he ran. Please explain why he isn't sitting in a cell next to Maddoff. You guys are SUCH hypocrites! Guess as long as you have your hand in the taxpayer pocket you'll stick up for these THIEVES. You certainly aren't any better. If we go over the cliff you're afraid that the checks and freebies are going to stop coming --- I really hope so, EVERYONE needs to have skin in the game to really appreciate that this country has a SPENDING problem.
@Ron-1861300#4.6: I realize everything you said in your first line is erroneous. Put enough people to work, and few will need medicaid. Contributions first are what makes the recipients eligible for Social Security and Medicare. Raise the eligibility age and contributory cutoff amounts adequate to the present stolen shortfalls and appropriate to future recipients. This problem is fixable, but like everything else we must have responsible governance to do it. Moreover, everything really, is dependent, more than anything else, on full and equitable employment. These are the gist of the basis of our real economic system. Leave any of these short and the whole system is out of balance. Regards
Hmm...unintentional wording error on my part (and thanks for pointing it out). What I meant was entitlement spending was over half of the budget. But I think everything else I said was factually correct.
As to employment being the key to solving the deficit problem - I largely agree with this statement...if we get a handle on spending. As an example, within a couple years after the Bush tax cuts were enacted, tax revenues increased - but we spent far more than the increased revenue. If Bush had kept spending at Clinton-era levels, we would have been fine. (unfortunately, he didn't have a Newt to push back in Congress like Clinton did)
@Ron-1861300#4.18: Totally agree with you. Stabilized revenue streams, along with responsible governance will align relative spending. Best regards
Marriott, have you ever heard of China?
Do you know what their military is doing? Do you know if the F-35 and the F-22 are countermeasures to the Chinese effort to match and/or exceed American air combat technology? I'm guessing that you don't, because you talk like a man with a paper asss.
BTW: the "Joint" part of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, means that four European NATO countries helped pay for the cost of developing the "Joint" Strike Fighter, and at least 10 others countries will be buying one or more of the three models available. These sales will produce revenue that will defray the cost of every aircraft that the U.S. government buys. There may be areas of the defense budget that can use a trim, but the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter isn't one of them.
You wrote: "We are paying billions on weapons that the pentagon says they don't need." No, we're not. There is still an on-going debate between the services regarding what is needed and what isn't. Nothing has been resolved. Distorting the truth to make a point is called making a straw man argument, and it's pathetic. If the truth doesn't support your argument, then distortion and exaggeration won't either.
You also wrote: "We are still equipped with very expensive weaponry designed for a cold war that is long since over." So, now you're trying to palm yourself off as an International Diplomat with special insight into the political and military tensions between the United States and well armed, adversaries like China, and potential adversaries, yet to be determined. You're kidding, right?
People with your naive, shortsightedness demanded that the U.S. demilitarize after WWI. They left us materially and technologically vulnerable to the aggressive military establishments of nations like Germany and Japan, because they didn't have the wisdom of forethought to anticipate the changing power structures in a world ravaged by economic hardship. They too thought the war was over.
Clearly, you have no special political or diplomatic insights, which would lend your opinions any more credence then the average high school senior.
Pat Boston writes: "The nation as a whole has been asking for huge cuts to defense, so it's not like this is any surprise for the president or Congress." Oh, really? Perhaps you can provide some verifiable evidence to support this claim; otherwise it's just your subjective opinion dressed up to look like a popular consensus. And how useful is that?
Boston, do you come here to lie to the readers, preach a political agenda, spread rumors, share your subjective opinions, inform us? What is your purpose in coming here? You are obviously biased. I just think it would be honest of you to just tell the readers what's your intent.
Seeking- I'm wondering, do you ever post any kind of supporting evidence for your claims? I've never seen you do it once. All you do is call everyone names like filthy, mental midgets, or saying things like "your disgusting lungs!" I don't know why you always have to be so nasty to anyone who says something you don't like, but it makes you an angry and bitter person. I've seen how all you do is post comments, call names, and tell people to "STFU" on every article all day because you have nothing better to do.
I'm also going to address just one comment you made, and I for one am going to "cite my reference." However, I don't think you even know what "citing your references" means, as it's something you never do. You are doing a disservice to out veterans when you make statements like "the 'system suckers' ... [are] veterans who have defended our country."
Let me tell you something- our veterans as a whole are NOT taken care of AT ALL. A recent article highlighted this problem:
"Unfortunately, a cold, hard examination of the facts reveals that the U.S. government is doing a horrific job of caring for our military veterans. U.S. government officials seem to be able to do a great job of laying wreaths and holding ceremonies, but when it comes to actually getting military veterans the care and benefits that they desperately need, the attitude seems to be 'deny, deny, deny until they die.'
The truth is that we have made it extremely difficult for our military veterans to claim the benefits that we have promised them. Vets have to fill out an absurdly complicated 23 page application and if they make even one small mistake their applications can be stonewalled for years. The U.S. Veterans Administration actually has a policy under which they pay large bonuses to employees that meet certain application processing goals. This explains why approximately 70% of the claims submitted to the Veterans Administration are refused or sent back to be redone. In fact, using the Freedom of Information Act, one local NBC station was able to learn that $250,000 was paid in bonuses to VA employees who work inside the Poff Federal Building in Roanoke, Virginia in just one year alone. According to CNN, we actually pay government employees huge bonuses for turning down the benefits applications of our military veterans.
The following is a list of facts about the treatment of our veterans from the Veterans Services Transparency website….
•1,000,000 veterans, are currently waiting for the VA to review their cases, many have been waiting for years. And would you believe it, the VA is still telling many of them that “their records have been lost.” (Source of numbers: Veteran Affairs web-site)
•400,304 (42%) of the veterans returning from Gulf War II have symptoms of Gulf War illness and have asked the VA for help. By the VA’s own records, over 178,000 (45%) of these soldiers have possible mental disorders (including PTSD and Traumatic Brain Damage). (Source of numbers; Analysis of VA Health Care Utilization Among US Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) Veterans, January 2009, pages 7, 11)
•58% of the Gulf War II veterans are between the ages of 18 – 29. These young adults are not being told when they enlist that there is a greater than 40% chance their future will be destroyed or severely altered by Gulf War illness. (Source: January 2009 report – Veteran’s Affairs)
•Of 133,057 potentially eligible disabled retirees, 28,283 were denied retroactive pay awards and 8,763 died waiting for their cases to be heard. (Source: Congressional Report reported in the ArmyTimes on July 21, 2008)
•Since 2001 there have been over 575,000 cases of Gulf War illness and no documented cases of recovery. But there have been at least 6,500 documented deaths.
•175,000 Gulf War I veterans with serious and persistent health problems, Gulf War illness, have been waiting over 17 years for assistance from the VA. During this period the VA has denied applications over and over again, shredded records, hid unopened claims in storage, and actually altered original documents to fit the program of denial designed by the VA leadership. (Source of numbers: Page 17 – Gulf War Illness and Health of Gulf War Veterans – Research Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses)"
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/memorial-day-shocker-how-the-u-s-government-really-handles-veterans-benefits-deny-deny-deny-until-they-die
Seeking- I rarely ever comment on anything...you can see that from my history. But I am tired of your name calling and the hatred in which you speak to people with. I am sick of seeing the hypocrisy in which you tell people they are ignorant, yet you are the one who doesn't provide anything to back up your statements. And yes, yes I'm sure you will have some kind of vitriol to spit at me for my comment...but that's OK- I wouldn't expect anything less!
So where's the Boner defict reduction plan? Oh yeah, cut taxes, cut food stamps, increase defnse spending and poof! the budget is balanced...you'd have to be an idiot not to see through this one...
Ummm...he's suggesting a tax rate increase...isn't that what you've been asking for? I realize it's not the exact rate increase Obama wants, but it's something...in fact, it's what Pelosi recommended about a year ago.
The GOP has offered to concede on tax rates and let them go up for people making over a million $ per year...in other words, they've moved more towards Obama's goal. But where are Obama's concessions? This is supposed to be a negotiation, ya know, give and take. The problem is that all you lame-ass libs just want to take - kind of like the bottomfeeders that overwhelmingly vote for your idiotic politicians. Where are Obama's spending cuts? Oh, that's right...he's asking for even more spending with another doomed stimulus!!!!
jwilson,
Excellent point!
Those "evil" Koch brothers will get hit with the tax increase just like all the liberals want...but Obama talks a vague game about spending cuts...
Rick wrote: "So where's the Boner defict reduction plan? Oh yeah, cut taxes, cut food stamps, increase defnse spending and poof! the budget is balanced...you'd have to be an idiot not to see through this one..." So Rick, are the readers supposed to take a person who uses a Bevis and Butthead euphemism for an erection serious in a discussion about economic spending? Or should we just consider you a brain damaged jerk wad, and ignore your commentary?
JK:
The Koch brothers and every other person of wealth is doing a Roth conversion on 90 to 95% of their portfolios, and Obama's taxes will net him squat.
Do you really think that the wealthy got wealthy by being stupid or unprepared? They knew the moment that Romney lost the election that Obama would come after them, so they are Rothing every money making instrument they own. Obama's got nothing, so Speaker Boehner's got nothing to lose.
I agree, JWM. Our Military Industrial Complex needs to be downsized. it's simply reprehensible that so much military spending occurs when those dollars are unnecessary and could be better left either UNSPENT or spent on programs such as improving the VA for our veterans, or using those dollars for infrastructure.
I will be deeply disappointed if Obama does not significantly reduce government spending. There's so much waste and fraud, it's disgusting.
There was talk of a $50 billion infrastructure number in there some where. What a joke! What's that? That's a trifle and isn't worth spit. Take that $1.5 Trillion for the F-35 JSF and put all that into Roads, Bridges, Power, Smartgrid... you watch core industry and services in America take off with that kind of infrastructure investment.
Our government is so out of touch, and our military seems to still be living in the Cold War Era.
Our people are hurting. Our economy is limping. And these politicians are doing nothing serious to provide impetus to fuel a turnaround. It's so sad.
Bubbawny, I have pointed out more than once on this page that in my isolated community, at the end of the day everybody works for the U.S. Navy. They are the single largest employer within fifty miles, and almost everything else in my county, including my own job, ultimately depends on their presence.
With that said, I don't believe that we can continue this reckless spending as though we were going to be at war with both Eurasia and Eastasia by next week. Major cuts in naval spending must neccesarily have a devastating effect on my town, but the simple, unavoidable truth is we can't afford it anymore!
Appeals to our patriotism, coming from a political bloc who have proven again and again that they don't care a rat's * for the fortunes of American families, are an insult. If we were to cut 20% out of the military weapons procurement budget (which wouldn't touch pay or maintenance), and then take half of that amount and put it into infrastructure, we could have the economy roaring again within a year or so.
Hi FatTrosky...I'm ex-Navy. I did a short term to serve my country. During my term, there was little in the military spending that went towards the human component of the Military, and way too much on missiles, missile defense, and other things that frankly never should have been funded to the extremes that they were. I understand the impact of the military on communities and towns like Norfolk, San Diego, and elsewhere.
I don't agree in cutting any benefits for the US Military Men, Women, and veterans. Quite the opposite. They should have living wages, better access to programs for education, civilian life re-entry, healthcare.
THe amount of money that's spent on these machines of war that never get used is just sick. It's not just the F-35JSF, but the Preventative Maintenance (men, parts, training), along with related investments (hardened storage, security, air / ground weapons).
You know, that money could do tremendous good spent on our infrastructure. And it's not like we would have to never do military investment again. But the time is now to re-direct those funds to infrastructure, along with the billions going to Pakistan, Afghanistan, South Korea, elsewhere...especially the funds going to Wall Street and Global Multinationals.
Main Street America needs a massive infrastructure program to rebuild the infrastructure required to be a platform for the next 50 years of American economic growth and output.
Bubba and Trotsky: Neither of you have a clue.
The R&D for the F-35 was shared by the U.S. and four NATO allies. 10 countries have already lined up to buy one or more variants of the F-35, which will defray the cost of every unit the U.S. buys.
The U. S. needs to replace the aging F-15 fleet with a new, 3rd generation air superiority fighter, capable of defeating the latest Russian and Chinese aircraft. The Cold War may be over, but there are always new threats from new adversaries, and adversaries yet to be determined. Should we be prepared or surprised and overwhelmed?
If you two don't mind, I prefer to leave our military cuts in the hands of U.S. military experts, rather then with two guys named Bubba and Trotsky.
The next war will be Cyber or economic or geopolitical warfare, not traditional engagements except for the backwoods sticks and stones throwers. I'm sure the F-15 and other drones and smartbombs are more than effective for the wars we are engaged in (don't need more than the technology we already have to destroy a guy in a hovel).
We've already got more military power than any other nation...by magnitudes. But we are losing the economic war, the education war, and the infrastructure war. Without manufacturing, intelligent engineers and skilled workers, America will continue to diminish. It's not military spending that will make us great. It's the needed investments in economic impacting fundamental infrastructure.
Plan B? Conservatives are okay with the Morning After Pill now? Well they did screw the working class.
It seems to me that just a couple of months ago, a certain 'boy wonder' from America's Dairyland was asserting that there were billions to be saved in Medicare simply by targeting 'waste, fraud, and abuse.'
I have heard this same mantra from Republican legislators and candidates in every state I have lived in, from Washington to Florida. Make sure everybody is honest and plays by the rules, they say, and the system will be solvent for all time to come.
Indeed, the way many of them talk, one might think that 'waste, fraud, and abuse' are using up the majority of the Medicare budget!
Why, then, do we never hear of this same approach being applied to the military budget? Why do so many of our elected officials seem to believe that there is no room for belt- tightening at the Pentagon, and that to even suggest such makes you an enemy of American servicemen? (And women.)
I completely agree - anytime you have a budget the size of the defense departments budget, there is bound to be waste and fraud. I would like to see the federal government really push to reduce waste and fraud in all departments. That was one of the tasks Clinton gave Gore in the 90's, and my understanding is Gore worked with the Republicans and made significant progress.
Of course, this needs to be an ongoing exercise and I'm guessing all the good they did has been reversed over the last 12 years. (or maybe I'm just being cynical today :-))
FoxTrotsky...
Over five hundred million dollars in fraud and waste have been rooted out as a direct result of changes that the ACA has brought into the system.
Chip- Five hundred million sounds like a lot, until one consider that it's just 1/2 of a billion, which is only one- one thousandth of a trillion. We're going to have to do a little better than that!
My point is that the Republicans seem, once again, to have blinders on; they can't see any further than Social Security and Medicare for spending cuts. The only cuts they're open to considering are going to come from programs that millions of Americans depend on for their very survival.
FoxTrotsky,
I agree the Republicans have blinders on when it comes to defense spending, but unfortunately, the current crop of Democrats also appear to be wearing the same blinders... We need to be pushing BOTH parties to change their stance on defense spending.
Ron 18, I don't know what political affiliation you claim, but you sound like you've got both feet on the ground and are more interested in finding a realistic, workable solution than in just slinging mud and making nasty comments about other posters.
Gee whiz, if only we had more of this kind of back-and-forth in the other Washington! Chances are we'd have a deal by now, and could all concentrate on relaxing with our loved ones for a couple of weeks of badly-needed R &R.
You have my attention and my respect, sir. Do let's make a habit of this.
Chip said,
"Over five hundred million dollars in fraud and waste have been rooted out as a direct result of changes that the ACA has brought into the system."
You really don't believe that?? do you?? Do you have any tangible proof of "fraud being rooted out"??
There have not been any savings from Obamacare and just wait until it is fully implemented!!
It will explode the budget/deficit for years to come then bankrupt the country!!
That's what Obamacare will do...it will bankrupt the country!!
Just don't ask me for anymore money because this is what YOU voted for... YOU pay for it!!
Maxx - proof please? YOU'RE asking for tangible proof well, so am I. Proof of your CLAIM!
Say, Maxx? Please excuse me for voting you up; that was completely unintended, I was aiming for 'Reply'.
Your previous posts clearly mark you as one of the die-hard Obama-haters club. You have absolutely nothing of value, or even of interest, to add to this discussion.
"Just don't ask me for anymore money... YOU pay for it!!" Oh, yes, how very typical- another right-winger who, over the entire course of his life, collects all of the benefits and blessings of living in a civilized nation, but seems to believe that he owes that socity nothing in return. You, sir, are the true parasitic class. You and your kind are greedy, selfish, and contribute nothing to our country's progress, or to this dialogue.
"Just don't ask me for anymore money... YOU pay for it!!" Ah, yes. Here is your Tea Party patriot, America; clinging to society's underbelly like a tick on a dog.
Please shut up and go away, Maxx; the grown-ups are trying to have a meaningful conversation here.
FoxTrotsky,
Thanks very much for the comments in 8.5!
As to "my party"...I vote about 60/40/10 Rep/Dem/Independent. As an example, I voted for Kerry and Obama, but I chose Romney this time.
A basic tenant in life for me is, I think everyone has good (and bad) ideas at times - so it's important to evaluate the merits of the idea and try to ignore the messenger as much as possible. And it also means being open to admitting that someone else's idea is better than mine at times.
Trotsky:
If the grown ups are trying to have a meaningful conversation, then why are you interrupting us.
What no one needs is a smug, self righteous know-it-all who brings little to the table but his own subjective opinion, and tries to pass it off as intellectual manna, talking down to the other readers.
You don't run the discussion here, nobody does. Obama haters are just as welcome as Obama ass kissers. OK? And please, don't flatter yourself. I can train a chimp to beg the question, appeal to fallacies and construct straw man arguments, just like you do.
You are nothing special, so get over yourself.
(Sighs tiredly) Arkius, I can only say to you, as I said so many times throughout my scholastic career:
"Well, excuse the F*** out of me for being literate!"
"brings little to the table but his own subjective opinion"- um, yeah, that's actually the whole purpose of this page. I'm sorry; would it infuriate you less if I were quoting statistics, or perhaps parroting somebody else's opinion, like most of the Wrong-wingers usually do?
"And please, don't flatter yourself- I can train a chimp to beg the question, appeal to fallacies and construct strawman arguments, just like you do-You are nothing special, so get over yourself."
(Fox raises right eyebrow, and in his best Spock baritone, says:) "Fascinating."
Offer , counter offer so it goes. Hey there pig person,Feisty you guys always say the Rs should accept what the Ds propose so your plan B is the same as A,C, D, E, etc thru the alphabet. The President has always been stuck on sticking to everybody over 250K like it makes a real difference. It doesn't revenue wise but it keeps a promise to the more rabid Demos who see compromise as a dirty word. No real difference between them and the far right as being willing to compromise. So why question Boehner's ability to deliver when the President has the same issue.
Okay when will Boehner figure out he isn't the President and to stop holding the U.S. hostage while he
continues to play his game. What a cry baby...enough already!!!
Hmm...Boehner offered to raise taxes on those making over $1 million/year with no strings attached...how is that holding the US hostage?
Thankfully, the delusional world you live where everyone is expected to bow down to whatever Obama wants, exists only in your addled mind.
Lilly,
When will the President decide he is not a dictator. There is three branches to the legislative branch of government.
US Government daily spending is over $11 Billion, the top four spenders are, HHS $3 Billion/day, SS $2.5 Billion/day, DoD $1.8 Billion/day and interest on the debt nearing $1 Billion/day but they only bring in almost $5 Billion/day. It is obvious to the most simple-minded, you can not spend this way and sustain yourself for very long. While the left wants to jump up and down about cutting defense spending, why don't they look at the complete picture and realize cuts need to be made everywhere? It's called reality, look into it, please.
Don't just blame the left. You read the results of the recent poll on GOPs indicating that they, as much as the left, didn't want to cut all those "entitlement" programs either, didn't you?
Apparently Obama Claus has declined to accept this offer as well. I say "go over the cliff." Boehner has given way more than Obama and his party will be looked at as the "party of No" not Republicans.
DrMan...
Really, the Speaker has given more? That's rich. This is the first time he's showed up with anything reasonable. I must have missed the part where the President shot down the offer. Harry isn't the President. I'm guessing there will be conversations between the two if they haven't happend already.
Nice try, the Republican Party has all but copyrighted the "Party of No" and it'll take sometime (if ever) before they shake that...
Chip, I was thinking it would be cool to take a lead from college bowl games, thus:
"The Credit Downgrade Republican Party of 'No' by Vetoed Veterans' Job Bill"
"The State-Mandated Vaginal Probe Republican Party by Collapsing Real Estate Bubble"
Hours of fun for the whole family!
Dr, Man you have got to be kidding, Obama won, get over it! The GOP is the party of no, I can't wait until the 2014 elections, I hope they are all voted out!
nanameaof...
If I'm reading Trotsky's post correctly, I think he agrees with you.
I know I agree with his previous point about the Republican myopathy. They're like white on rice when it comes to social programs. It's almost like they believe that there isn't a Republican on the planet that is using those programs.
Yep you're right...the Empty Suit won and now he owns it...if we go over the cliff....which is what he really wants....it's his doing...so you can thank the Empty Suit when your taxes go up...He and Harry Reid are the ones holding the middle class hostage.......
Just yesterday President Obama went from $250K to $400K in a concession to the Republicans.. and then Boehner moves the goal posts and skyrockets the number up to $1 Million.. and then you make up this nonsense about how much Boehner has 'given'??
The American public is smarter than you are giving them credit for.. (they elected the right person in the Election) and they will easily figure out who is responsible for the mess the country will be in if Boehner lets us go off the cliff by not taking the sort of deal the majority of the American people want --aka the sort of deal Obama is offering.
The Ball is in the Republicans court --- as they know what platform the President was re-elected on.. which is restoring fairness in the American System.
And Boehner is willing to go down in history as obviously bending over backwards to protect the rich
(The American rich who btw have been doing fine while the rest of the country have suffered._). Trust me, as I, myself live in a affluent suburb of San Diego,CA and there has been no slow-down of spending in my community or no slow down of shiny brand new exotic European cars rolling up and down the streets in my town.
Paraphrasing a page out of one of John F. Kennedy's famous speeches -- "Ask not what your country can do for you.. ask what you can do for your country"
the Rich can afford to help out the country this time, (as they have vastly enjoyed the fruits of this country for the last few decades) now it is time that they can show their Economic Patriotism.. that is not too much to ask of a true Patriot .. is it?
I have the solution leave the tax rates alone raise minimum wage to $13 per hour. make employers pay health care for all there employees. Raise the pay for those serving in our armed forces. Collect child support from the dead beat parents. This would take away most of the need for food stamps, Medicade and many other programs for the poor.
Sure, until large corporations lay off 10% of their workers to pay for the increased cost of doing business, small businesses just go under...then we will have a 15% unemployment rate and be in a death spiral like Greece and Spain.
We are already paying the money, We give the average Walmart employee $6,000 to $8,000 per year in tax money. You have to be a officer in the army not to be able to get food stamps. These companies would need the employees to handle the business. When minimum wage goes up we always have threats of job cuts but it doesn't happen. Greece was paying people not to work and they didn't collect taxes on the rich. They blow a bunch of money on the Olympics. The GNP would grow. Look at history.
BobnSnuff--do some research before you espouse things that don't make sense! Teenager employment has dropped signicanctly since the increase of the Minimum Wage. Businesses make up for increased costs somewhere, either raising prices or cutting costs.
With that logic, why not make employers just pay $13,000/hr? Then people can afford their own health insurance, pay their mortgages, and who would need child support anyway? Why hasn't anyone else thought of your solution? Oh, yeah, because employers would need to pass the increased payroll costs to their customers (or fold up shop). Heck, let's just multiply our currency by 1000, and do away with anything smaller than a $10 bill? That'll do the trick. Sheesh.
Teen Employment dropped because of other people taking the jobs, the jobs didn't go away. Do your research .Walmart, Mc Donalds, Target all have increased jobs. A large part of the job growth has been in these low paying jobs. Payroll makes up 10% of most business costs so if all the employees make munimum wage they have to raise their prices 3% to cover it. Pappa Johns have to raise the cost of their pizza by 10 cents to give all their employees health care. The CEO of walmart makes $17,000,000 per year, they can pay the people that make the money enough to live on.
Ok Obama lets see if you are close to the President Bill Clinton was. Take this compromise thats what Clinton did. If obama doesnt take this then over the cliff we go. No way in hell Obama can turn down taxes on people making over a million. I didnt think 200k was really considered rich anyway. Hell that want even buy most cars that the rich drive. I would say 200k or even 400k would not be considered rich ayways. However I think everybody can agree 1 million is rich.
That sounds like a plan if it includes the automatic government spending cuts that are to take place on Jan. 1.
GOPukes are still holding our nation hostage for the richest 1%; vote those traitors out!
So, rather than allow the bill already passed by the Senate, which gives everyone a break up to 250K, to get a vote in the House, which would mean that POTUS could sign it this week, Bonehead has to play more delaying games. This is a delaying game, period. We are going off the cliff.
Why isent the GOP,who lost bye 126 votes,just do their job?quit trying to make it look like you faild less,losers
Get a deal done,,enough of the dog and pony show
Ole Bonehead will do anything to keep from having to pay more taxes. Boner, YOU LOSE, you will be paying more taxes. The Republicans will do anything to protect their rich friends. Just leave our Medicare and Social Security alone. Want to cut entitlements, Get rid of Oil subsidies and foreign aid and tax benefits for companies that move American jobs off shore.
I totally agree with you 60s Veteran! Those GOP congress boys, particularly "Bonehead" are the Kings of Supterfuge! They want you to believe it's President Obama who is holding things up by presenting him with ridiculous Plan BS, that doesn't realistically deal with the fiscal problems! The consistently live in "lala land" even tho 63% of the nation is behind the Dem plan, even tho they are putting their jobs on the line just to please the Teaparty! They have conceded to let tax breaks expire for the rich but want still want to implement the "Ryan plan" on spending cuts! They seem to forget seniors (babyboomers) like you and me are the biggest voting block in this country, and poor Latinos and Blacks would be next! I totally agree to that if they want to cut entitlement they should get rid of corporate welfare, cut benefit to companies who move out of the US and, one you forgot, cut defense dept. spending, which even the defense dept. itself oks! Ending the war in Afghanistan would save us billions too and more of our sons! I also agree they should leave programs for the elderly, middle class and poor alone, especially ss, medicare and ACA! We are the ones who grow the economy! I still believe their ridiculous plan is still about making Obama look bad! They are still pissed off he won a 2nd term and made Mitch McConnell look stupid! They got a lot of balls trying to run the show when they were the losers and have not given up stonewalling progress while shouting "it's the will of the people"! What people? The 2% rich?
Wake up you libs, you are being manipulated! Lack of revenue is not the problem--overspending is the problem. Look what Obummer wants a blank check for the next two years, without oversight. This from a man who outspent all of the other Presidents in his first three years. The tax increase only will run the govmint for 10 days at most. STOP THE SPENDING!!
Some posted "Bonehead" made $225K a year. Under Obama plan he would not pay more.
Unfortunalty Obama has already touched our ss by the payroll tax cut. Its not really a tax cut at all the 2% comes from our ss tax we pay in. So I would suggest a 2% payroll tax on fed income tax not ss.
If it looks like a,deal,it looks like they tried.In reality,it's off the cliff we go,,,hohohohohohoho
So any of these tactics still have to pass the senate,,looks like itsmoffmthemfawking cliff folks,and let's blame all,but please,let's,go over the cliff.
The GOP. Still following the yellow brick road. Looking for the magical Wizard of OZ. Who it seems is nothing but a fake, con man. Just like all Republicans.
I say over the fiscal cliff. And be done with this session of Congress! Let every sector of American society adjust back to the reality of Clinton era economics and fiscal discipline. If the President agrees to any deal with this toxic, TeaBag Congress, It will be a very bad one for him and us. He will be projected as the loser by the media, Boehner & his GOP extortionists and rightfully by his Democratic base. Democratic supporters will be done with him. And he will be a lame duck President on his inauguration day. I dearly hope he is not this naive.
JUST LET THE BUSH TAX CUTS DIE! That alone is the cause of this fiscal mess.
Johnny, you're in over your head. Obama doesn't want the Bush tax cuts to die. They give tax relief to the middle class. Obama wants to alter them to exclude the upper tax bracket. Didn't you read the article?
Speaker of the House Boehner is not an extortionist, he represents 48% of the national constituency, and they deserve his representation. He is morally bound to speak on behalf of these people. Why do you have a problem with that? It has been the American way since day one. What is your problem?
The Speaker and Obama are negotiating from their political perspectives; it's been this way for 237 years, and I hope it never changes. It is the two party system and it works pretty damn well.
I'm positive that they will hammer out an agreement that will benefit the American people, and get us back on the right economic track.
Has there been anything said about the cuts? I think the $400k option is more than fair for the taxes. They also need to reinstate the 2% social security contribution and quit messing with it.
At least we are finally seeing some give and take from both sides in Washington. Refreshing and about time.
Boehner just insists on beating the working man in the ground. He also wants to take away from medicare, if you work you might be able to scrape by if your on a fixed income your in trouble. I have a way to generate revenue, effect immediatly all politicians will take a 30% cut in there pension and pay 35% of the cost of there health insurance. If the american people would see how much the cost savings would be on tax payers it would open some eyes. They all think it's fine to cut us in every way don't you think this is a fair deal for them?
"Boehner just insists on beating the working man in the ground."
Why do you say that Allen? Is Boehner advocating that taxes go up for the "working man"? Is boehner wanting to impose new laws against the "working man" that somehow make it tougher on him?
Weaver:
Please show some evidence to support your claim that Speaker Boehner wants to beat "the working man in the ground (sic)."
Weaver, the deficit is $1.34 trillion dollars. The cuts you're suggesting save $100 million at best. They are a drop in the bucket and aren't worth the effort.
The thought for today- *your* is the possessive pronoun of you. You're is a contraction of *you are*.
When oh when will you liberals get the truth. Never, you don't want to face it yet it is all on record. Lets try again, the top 2% opf this nation earners now lpay 59.9% of our taxes >LOOK IT UP. How much more do you want? What do you pay? 5o% pay nothing and are on wellfair, , food stamps, free rent, SS disabiity, It all has to happen before you wake uunemployment 96 weeks. Your check will soon bounce the country is breoke. You get what you voted for Obama
Gene, they pay much LESS as a percentage of their earnings than do other economic classes. How is that fair?
At this point it's about pain, Gene. The only way out of this mess is for EVERYONE to pony up a bit and share the pain. How is it fair for the top 2% to pay less, as a percentage of theior income, in taxes, as the rest of us?
Yes, welfare entitlements need to be looked at as well. Meanwhile, why do the top 2% not pay their fair share as a percent of their income?
Gene - what part do YOU not understand? 50% pay nothing and are on welfare is a total LIE. Social Security is NOT welfare - these people paid into SS their entire life and should be able to get SS. Of the 47% who pay no FEDERAL TAXES - all pay taxes. Veterans who have served and paid taxes are part of this group. So are the working poor who often work two jobs just to keep food on the table and a roof over their heads.
You really need to get a clue before posting nonsense. You just look stupid!
so if the country is broke that means congress doesn't get paid? they work for us so shouldn't their checks stop first? shouldn't their benefits be cut first? and remember GE doesn't pay taxes. NONE. and remember that Big Oil is also on welfare to the tune of 4 billion a year. as a matter of fact if you took all the welfare/subsidy checks given to big business they add up to more than the American public gets.
SeekingSanity, where the hell did you get the info that veterans don't pay federal income taxes? If you're going to spout "facts" at least be FACTUAL. Military pay - both active duty pay and retirement pay - is subject to federal income tax. I know, I pay it every frickin' month!
sprockethead, the wealthy do not pay less percentage of their income in taxes. that is a lie perpetrated by this administration. they pay 35% on all their earned income. i am sure you pay no where near that. they pay less (15%) on their investment income which is the same everyone pays, its called capital gains tax. more than 45% of the people in this country pay no federal income tax and in fact get money back from the govt that amounts to welfare. everyone in this country should pay something into the cost of the govt, even if it is 10 dollars a year they need some skin in the game. its not fair to expect the well off to cover all the expenses of our country, they already pay almost 60% of those expenses now. we need to stop overspending, not raise taxes.
I must be missing something. Where does it say I have to make more than X dollars and I will get different tax brakes (loop holes) than someone making less than X dollars. Increasing the tax rate on those that making more than $250K, $400K, or $1M a year does nothing if the loop holes are not closed. Even then it still does not make up the amount money this idiot is spending. I knew all of Obama talk was BS when he said in one of the debates he found loop holes corps were use and that he planned to close them. What did he do find them just before the debate. Why didn't he fix them during his first term. Fix the loop holes and everyone will pay there fare share otherwise the (who can afford to pay someone to find the loopholes) rich will continue to pay less
Maybe because CONGRESS has to close them, the President does not have that solo power you clueless MORON.
Seeking Sanity:
Merry Christmas, you are not the brightest bulb on the tree.
First you claim: "Gene - what part do YOU not understand? 50% pay nothing and are on welfare is a total LIE," and then you claim: "Of the 47% who pay no FEDERAL TAXES - all pay taxes." Well which is it? Do 47% of the American people pay taxes? Or do 47% of the American people pay no taxes?
You can't have it both ways. Pick one way and go with it. Otherwise, you look like an intellectual buffoon.
BTW: Gene argues that nominally, 50% percent of the population doesn't pay taxes, and is collecting welfare of some sort. Can you argue that point with some degree of clarity? Your other post is written so poorly, that it's almost incoherent.
Sprockethead wrote: "Gene, they pay much LESS as a percentage of their earnings than do other economic classes. How is that fair?" What do you suppose they do with the rest of their money? Shove it up their asses? Burn it? Boil it? What do you think they do with it, Einstein? They invest it. They help create new companies, or reinvigorate old ones. They help create jobs, so have-not morons, who haven't got a clue about how the economy actually works, can piss and moan about the haves.
The other economic classes don't invest in America. How is that fair? You whine like a little girl, about something you don't know much about. Please stop; you're hurting my brains.