Where are the Spending Cuts? (interview, premium, compared, security)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The democrats simply want no limits of any kind on spending -- they want unlimited ability to confiscate the wealth of this country.
The Republicans want massive cuts in entitlement programs, but don't want to have to take responsibility for those cuts. And boo-hoo for them, President Obama isn't going to put it on the table for them. And the fact that they can't get the Democrats to do for them what the GOP promised, during months and months of campaigning, that it would do is making the Republicans a very whiney bunch.
The Republicans want massive cuts in entitlement programs, but don't want to have to take responsibility for those cuts. And boo-hoo for them, President Obama isn't going to put it on the table for them. And the fact that they can't get the Democrats to do for them what the GOP promised, during months and months of campaigning, that it would do is making the Republicans a very whiney bunch.
Well if that's what they want then they're just parroting what Obama's own appointees have stated needs to be done.
Quote:
Board of Trustees. A Board established by the Social Security Act to oversee the financial operations of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund. The Board is composed of six members. Four members serve by virtue of their positions in the Federal Government: the Secretary of the Treasury, who is the Managing Trustee; the Secretary of Labor; the Secretary of Health and Human Services; and the Commissioner of Social Security. The President appoints and the Senate confirms the other two members to serve as public representatives. Also referred to as the “Board” or the “Trustees”.
Lawmakers could eliminate the actuarial deficit for the 75-year period by immediately increasing the combined payroll tax from 12.40 percent to 15.16 percent,1 immediately decreasing scheduled benefits by 17.0 percent, or using a combination of these approaches. The Trustees project that these changes would be sufficient to eliminate the actuarial deficit and leave an actuarial balance of zero for the OASDI program.
Maybe you should ask yourself if the president is actually looking at reality and then maybe you should ask yourself the same question. Or are you just down to play politics like Frank here is doing?
It took the president three weeks to gather up enough courage (snickers) to send Geithner (who will be leaving government soon) to handle his negotiations for him.
Maybe you should ask yourself why you're being pathetic and childish and expecting a few days for a counter offer...
Frankly (snickers), I don't care how many times you repeat yourself since it's blatantly obvious you live in a fantasy world.
Well if that's what they want then they're just parroting what Obama's own appointees have stated needs to be done.
So... it is your contention that Republicans actually have no actual original position at all? They don't even get credit for wanting to cut spending? They're just "parroting" the president's team?
That would at least explain why they have offered no counter to the President's proposal.
It took the president three weeks to gather up enough courage (snickers) to send Geithner (who will be leaving government soon) to handle his negotiations for him.
And in all that same time the Republicans have not had the courage (snicker) to offer anything at all.
(Oooh... I must really have your undies in a bunch to have inspired actual cyber stalking. I won't return the favor because, Frankly (snicker), you're not formidable enough to even care who you really are.)
So... it is your contention that Republicans actually have no actual original position at all? They don't even get credit for wanting to cut spending? They're just "parroting" the president's team?
Gosh you're like a three year old that doesn't seem to understand what you're looking at but still feels like they should say something, anything.
The president appoints a bunch of people who then make recommendation on how to make solvent (temporarily) a program they firmly hold on to.
Then, when negotiations start they completely abandon those positions and throw America under the bus for political gain and power and you somehow come to the conclusion that it's all the republicans fault.
May I remind you that democrats have had the senate since 2007 and they had the house up until 2011 and the presidency since 2009 and they've done zero in making solvent a program they firmly want to be around for the foreseeable future.
That's pathetic and childish and you're playing right along with them. How hypocritical is it for a "Health Care Executive" to play complicit in the abolishing of health policy for 53 million people.
I'm pretty sure that's the whole definition of cutting your nose off to spite your face.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
That would at least explain why they have offered no counter to the President's proposal.
So Obama gets three weeks to make an absurd power gran non-proposal and you want in a text message like fashion a counter offer from republicans?
I mean how old are you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
And in all that same time the Republicans have not had the courage (snicker) to offer anything at all.
Repeating lies... So Behner sat down with the president and they stared at each other for hours. The president, Geithner and every other democrat knows what house republicans want because they passed a budget stating exactly that.
Did Obama or the democrat ran Senate pass a budget? I think it's been over 1,000 days now since they've done so.
Talk about hypocrisy and playing the mental midget role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude
(Oooh... I must really have your undies in a bunch to have inspired actual cyber stalking. I won't return the favor because, Frankly (snicker), you're not formidable enough to even care who you really are.)
It is obvious that the GOP has NO PLAN! They only want to criticize and filibuster!
The president has veto power which ultimately means they need to come together on this whole issue. Instead, what you're seeing is democrats throwing America under the bus for political gain and power and making absurd request about dictatorial powers over the budget.
Just remember how bad you'd be freaking out if bush had asked congress to turn over their powers of the purse and if you play complicit in this plan that it's a two-edged sword later on down the line.
The president appoints a bunch of people who then make recommendation on how to make solvent (temporarily) a program they firmly hold on to.
Then, when negotiations start they completely abandon those positions and throw America under the bus for political gain and power and you somehow come to the conclusion that it's all the republicans fault.
It is the Republican's fault, and no, the President did not "completely abandon those positions."
I know you've seen this before. But let's do this again anyway.
February 14, 2011: President Barack Obama submits budget for 2012 with about $2 trillion in deficit reduction, half of which come from spending cuts.
April 15, 2011: House passes Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget, which includes $5.8 trillion in spending cuts along with tax cuts for the richest Americans.
May 5, 2011: Vice President Joe Biden begins debt talks.
May 11, 2011: Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) says he will not raise debt limit without spending cuts that match how much the limit is raised.
June 23, 2011: Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) walks away from debt ceiling talks with Biden after refusing to consider any tax increases. The administration had offered $2.4 trillion in spending cuts for $400 billion in taxes, an 83:17 split.
July 7, 2011: Obama and Boehner begin debt-ceiling negotiations.
July 9, 2011: Boehner walks away from Obama’s “grand bargain”: $4 trillion in debt reduction comprised of $1 trillion in revenue and $3 trillion in spending cuts, including entitlement reforms.
July 19, 2011: The Gang of Six proposes a $4 trillion deficit reduction plan, including $2 trillion in revenue.
July 22, 2011: Again, Boehner walks away from negotiations after Obama offers $1.2 trillion in revenues and $1.6 trillion in spending cuts, including entitlements.
July 31, 2011: Debt ceiling agreement is reached, cutting $1 trillion in spending immediately and establishing the super committee to reduce deficits by at least an additional $1.2 trillion.
October 26, 2011: Democrats first super committee offer is $3 trillion in deficit reduction comprised of about $1.3 trillion in revenues and $1.7 trillion in spending cuts, including cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Republicans immediately reject it. Republicans’ first super committee offer is $2.2 trillion in deficit reduction, which includes no new tax revenues.
November 8, 2011: Republicans’ second super committee offer is $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction. It does include $300 billion in new tax revenue, but in exchange for extending the Bush tax cuts and lowering the top tax rate. The plan would ultimately cut taxes for the wealthy and raise them for everyone else.
November 10, 2011: Democrats’ second offer is $2.3 trillion in deficit reduction, consisting of $1.3 trillion in spending cuts and $1 trillion in revenue. The revenue would be split between $350 billion in concrete measures and $650 billion in future tax reform. Republicans reject it.
November 11, 2011: Democrats agree to Republicans’ top lines including just $400 billion in revenues and $875 billion in spending cuts, but refuse to accept the GOP’s tax cut for the rich. Republicans reject it and make their final offer: $640 billion in spending cuts and $3 billion in revenues.
You will note... many of last year's Democratic offers derived significant content from the Bowles-Simpson committee. The Democrats offered spending cuts to revenue at a four to one ratio. They offered spending cuts totaling three trillion dollars. All that was necessary was for Republicans to reach out and grab them.
Instead, they decided that they hated the President more than they loved their country so they walked away.
Deal with this simple point of current political reality. Republicans will never again see an offer as good as several that they got last year. They played politics rather than governed, and it has come back to bite them on the ass. The President has learned something from last years debacle, but to this point the Republicans have not shown any similar learning curve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
That's pathetic and childish and you're playing right along with them. How hypocritical is it for a "Health Care Executive" to play complicit in the abolishing of health policy for 53 million people.
Ignoring your apparent sudden hallucination regarding my complicity in something you can't even seem to to characterize coherently, if you want to debate health policy you should start another thread. I've told you more than once that I will not chase red herring here that you've thrown out for no reason other than to distract attention from your previous boners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
So Obama gets three weeks to make an absurd power gran non-proposal and you want in a text message like fashion a counter offer from republicans?
It was the same three weeks that Republicans had... and from them we've still heard nothing. We'll ignore that it was also exactly what he had campaigned on, and was reelected by the American people to pursue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
I mean how old are you?
LOL... you've been frantically cyber-stalking me. Why don't you tell us all how old I am?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475
Repeating lies... So Behner sat down with the president and they stared at each other for hours. The president, Geithner and every other democrat knows what house republicans want because they passed a budget stating exactly that.
Hand waving is not an actual offer. Generalities are not negotiations. Republicans have said they want entitlement cuts, but they won't say which ones. Republicans have said they'll accept new revenue, but they won't say how or where the revenue would come from. Republicans have said they'll make concessions on deductions, but they won't say which ones. Republicans have said they expect deep spending cuts, but they've offered no specifics.
We've got a specific offer from Obama that spells out in great detail what he wants on the revenue side. We are still waiting for a specific offer from Boehner that spells out in any detail at all what he wants on the spending side.
Tic-toc, tic-toc... the ball remains in the Republican court.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
