A $1.5 trillion deficit ought to be cause for compromise
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the deficit for fiscal 2011 will hit $1.5 trillion, or almost 10 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. While the estimate is considerably higher than earlier CBO estimates, it’s also not a surprise. The estimates jumped after Congress and President Obama agreed late last year to extend the Bush tax cuts and continue paying extended unemployment benefits, in some cases for as long as 99 weeks.
Source: CBO/Jay Bookman
By law, the CBO is also required to try to look 10 years into the future in order to give policymakers some guidance about the longer-term impact of their decisions. The chart to the right, for example, documents the CBO projection of what the deficit — as a share of gross domestic product — will do between now and 2020.
At first glance, it doesn’t look so bad. Note the sudden improvement in fiscal 2013 and 2014, with the deficit as a share of GDP dropping by more than two-thirds. However, that improvement assumes that the Bush tax cuts disappear as scheduled after 2012, with taxes reverting to 2000 levels. (It also assumes that other pieces of law, including the so-called “doc fix,” are allowed to disappear as scheduled.)
Congressional Republicans, of course, have no intention of allowing that to happen. They have convinced themselves and their followers that it is possible to address a problem of this magnitude simply by cutting spending.
They have not, however, been able to convince the accountants or anybody else with any familiarity with the numbers.
For example, the GOP’s ambition is to force a cut of as much as 20 percent in non-defense discretionary spending, a step that would do very real damage to popular, even necessary programs. But let’s say that they succeed, that they are able to get those cuts through a Democratic Senate and signed into law by President Obama. What will they have accomplished?
Well, nondefense discretionary spending amounts to 15 percent of the budget. Cutting 15 percent of the budget by 20 percent cuts the overall budget by a whopping 3 percent. That doesn’t come close to offsetting the impact of making the Bush tax cuts permanent.
Earlier this week, in the GOP response to the president’s State of the Union, U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan spoke of the deficit in near apocalyptic terms:
“Speaking candidly, as one citizen to another: We still have time… but not much time. If we continue down our current path, we know what our future will be.
Just take a look at what’s happening to Greece, Ireland, the United Kingdom and other nations in Europe. They didn’t act soon enough; and now their governments have been forced to impose painful austerity measures: large benefit cuts to seniors and huge tax increases on everybody.
Their day of reckoning has arrived. Ours is around the corner. That is why we must act now.”
Personally, I thought Ryan’s rhetoric was a bit melodramatic, but the problem he describes is real. If he is honest in his concern, he knows that as a matter of politics and a matter of math, the problem can be addressed only through a combination of spending cuts and tax increases.
Republicans can’t enact spending cuts of the size needed, particularly in slowing the growth in entitlements, without Democratic help. Democrats can’t enact tax increases of the size needed without Republican help. Together, it is possible to fix this. Apart, it is not.
Bottom line, says the CBO:
“To prevent debt from becoming unsupportable, policymakers will have to substantially restrain the growth of spending, raise revenues significantly above their historical share of GDP, or pursue some combination of those two approaches.”
The longer we pretend otherwise, the worse the problem becomes.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
508 comments Add your comment
josef nix
January 27th, 2011
5:17 pm
The bottom line is that until the government makes it more profitable to produce and market goods domestically, nothing will change in the downward spiral, It is high time they get back in the tariff business.
Scout
January 27th, 2011
5:17 pm
There ought to be some way to go back and sue the one’s responsible for this – on EITHER side.
Now before you start with well they can’t do their job with the fear of being sued ……… law enforcement officers are sued civilly and prosecuted criminally sometimes for decisions they have to make in less than a SECOND.
Shouldn’t others be held accountable for what they did over a period of months or years ?
And being voted out of office doesn’t seem quite “just” enough.
Hillbilly Deluxe
January 27th, 2011
5:17 pm
My opinion, not that it’s worth anything, is that by the time “Son of A Son Of A Sailor” came out in ‘78, Jimmy Buffett’s best work was behind him. I saw him in ‘75, right after “Havanna Daydreaming” came out. It was more about the music then, the Parrothead thing hadn’t been thought up, at that time.
Left wing management
January 27th, 2011
5:17 pm
The German (”Rhenish”) model of capitalism is right now looking far stronger than the Anglo-American version for a variety of reasons, foremost among them being the checks and balances against pure speculative finance getting a hold over the reins of mid-size and large companies. Unlike their Anglo-American counterparts, German companies have supervisory boards which include a certain percentage of labor representatives and which ensures that decisions are made based on more variable considerations than the narrowly stock-performance-driven management models in US companies. In other words, German companies define “stakeholder” differently than US companies. German companies also have traditionally had closer ties to “House banks” and less reliance on speculative capital and financial instruments for their financing needs.
In other words, just as the American political system prides itself on its many checks and balances between branches, which provides safeguards and stability, German companies have their own checks and balances against the more destabilizing elements of capitalism gaining too much of a foothold. But ultimately, this is made possible by a far greater sense of caution towards Anglo-American laissez faire capitalism and a much greater sense of the needs of the worker – i.e. labor unions.
Oh, and of course they also have a deep manufacturing and engineering tradition that is still valued highly – unlike us.
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:19 pm
Hey! Tax Day has been extended to April 18th.
We should all send ‘em a memo now. It should read: “Distinguished” colleagues…We the people, after having watched your little spending games, will be withholding all disposable income from the economy. No stimulating between now and then”. OR…we could all change our W-4s listing dependents that don’t really exist. Make up fake SS numbers…tax credits to which we aren’t entitled. Keep ‘em confused until the day of reckoning. Stall ‘em. Sweat ‘em.
We could be the wrenches that stop their gears from turning.
‘Tis a pleasant dream I’ve often had.
Can’t arrest everybody at once.
Scout
January 27th, 2011
5:20 pm
josef:
Please see my 3:11 downstairs
Hillbilly Deluxe
January 27th, 2011
5:20 pm
josef @ 5:17
Good point. We’re both stuck in the 19th century, though.
barking frog
January 27th, 2011
5:22 pm
“We cannot afford to reduce taxes, reduce income,until we have in sight a program of expenditure that shows that the factors of income and outgo will be balanced.”
quote from Ike when pressured to reduce taxes by Republican Congress
The median family paid less than 20% of income in taxes in 1955.
The wealthy paid a lot, the middle not so much.
Heard that anywhere lately?
Observer
January 27th, 2011
5:24 pm
Forgive me for being off topic…….but “Come on Man”!!
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2011/01/sarah_palins_weird_sputnik_sto.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
saywhat?
January 27th, 2011
5:24 pm
Exactly Jay, and notice how Pogo STILL seems to think spending cuts ALONE will solve the problem? What column did he read, if any, before posting?
Paul
January 27th, 2011
5:26 pm
“Personally, I thought Ryan’s rhetoric was a bit melodramatic, but the problem he describes is real.”
I’d call it ‘the 2×4 upside the head’ approach. Poll after poll show people want spending cut… just not stuff they want.
Prediction: Democrats absolutely will not suggest any Social Security reform. When Republicans finally do (and they won’t want to , as they see what’s coming) Democrats will launch attack after attack. It’s what’s worked in the past.
Neither party wants Defense cuts. Only cuts discussed are coming from SecDef Gates. Pathetic.
Ag subsidies? Who’s calling for cutting or eliminating? Sen McCain comes to mind. ‘bout ends there.
Rep Ryan needs a 6×12 –
AmVet
Fountain of Youth, coming up!
http://tinyurl.com/4rav6zg
One small problem, it only makes the opposite sex look younger in your eyes and yourself younger in your mind!
Robert 4:30
“……By the time Obama took office…….The smelly republicans can’t spin this.”
Rear-view mirror stuff. We’ve moved on to fixing the problem, not blame.
kayaker 71
“Eliminate our involvement in Afghanistan and cut way back in Iraq. Bring home all of our military in Japan, So Korea and Europe. Use many of these troops…”
I’d suggest reducing the rolls, not using them elsewhere. And use the DoD manpower tables to eliminate all the HQ and other support personnel – military and civilian – associated with those overseas units. That’s how you save dollars. Otherwise, you’re just moving pieces around the board.
Peadawg
January 27th, 2011
5:26 pm
With regard to spending cuts, go after low hanging fruit: defense cuts recommended by Secretary Gates, farm subsidies, oil subsidies, and other forms of welfare for millionaires.
Why just the millionaires? Go after ALL forms of entitlements and welfare.
marky mark
January 27th, 2011
5:27 pm
Joe, to add to your list – remove all military bases from countries around the world where the host country is unwilling to fund the majority of the cost. That is why some countries economic power appears to be in better shape than ours. While they may have a military (Japan and Germany are examples) they dont have to devote the resources most countries have to for their own defence. And I also would stop disproportionate funding of various world agencies/fighting forces – we always seem to be the last of any coalition on the ground, whether combat or humanitarian.
Jefferson
January 27th, 2011
5:28 pm
The congress will keep spending, revenue enhancement will happen. Now choose based on who has the most left to decide who pays the most taxes. I know who I choose.
BlahBlahBlah
January 27th, 2011
5:31 pm
Your wording in this article implies Republicans are solely to blame for the “doc fix”, which is foolish.
BlahBlahBlah
January 27th, 2011
5:31 pm
Jay, besides the military, what would you cut that would make a dent in the deficit?
md
January 27th, 2011
5:32 pm
Don’t count on anything getting done by a group of folks that depend on votes for their livelihood……….
Compromise will occur when the crisis dictates it……a la Greece (and several others).
Question is…..will it come too late??
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:32 pm
Stratfor had an interesting piece on Obama’s defense strategy. It’s a freebie.
The difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is that a wrenching crisis can be averted in Afghanistan simply by continuing to do what the United States is already doing. By continuing to do what it is doing in Iraq, the United States inevitably heads into a crisis as the troop level is drawn down.
If I had to pick and choose, I’d pull out of Afghanistan and return to Iraq.
Read more: Obama’s State of the Union and U.S. Foreign Policy | STRATFOR
Del
January 27th, 2011
5:33 pm
And the Democrats were solely to blame for taking the “doc fix” out of ObamaCare.
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:33 pm
Whoops!
Obama’s State of the Union and U.S. Foreign Policy is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:35 pm
Caught between Barack and a hard place.
marky mark
January 27th, 2011
5:35 pm
And to all of our left/center left friends that believe the republicans are the only military backers….try shutting down any military base or military production line in the most liberal member of congress’ district….and then stand back and watch the outrage. They understand the jobs involved, too. Or how do you think the south is so full of military bases? Perhaps its because the Armed Forces subcommittee was full of southern democrats for 45 + years…..
md
January 27th, 2011
5:36 pm
“It is high time they get back in the tariff business.”
Trade war??
Not too sure that would be a good idea either.
md
January 27th, 2011
5:38 pm
“remove all military bases from countries around the world where the host country is unwilling to fund the majority of the cost.”
hear hear………………
And charge the guys in the neighborhood for defense vs having the understanding that we will come running if needed. Living off us needs to stop…superpower or no superpower.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
5:38 pm
@@
‘Caught between Barack and a hard place.”
Careful, or people are gonna think this is you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKsoXHYICqU
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:40 pm
DANG! I just saw this part in that Stratfor piece.
Obama does not yet have a coherent strategy stretching from Iraq to Afghanistan. Certainly, he inherited the wars, but they are now his. The Afghan war has no clear endpoint, while the Iraq war does have a clear endpoint — but it is one that is enormously dangerous.
I’ve been thinking the same thing all along. Afghanistan was the WRONG war, not the RIGHT war. The LEFT’S war, not the RIGHT’S war.
Read more: Obama’s State of the Union and U.S. Foreign Policy | STRATFOR
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:42 pm
Paul:
Believe me, I have no crush on Obama. I think the guy came into office clueless. He’s also a slow learner.
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
5:42 pm
Observer, somebody shoot me!
I listened to that entire interview of Sarah BaraClueless and that woman can drone on and on and on and on and say…………………………………………..nothing!
I’m serious, listen to it yourselves, oh ye faithful. It is one endless sound bite and bumper sticker.
No specifics. Nothing informative. Nothing with any meat on it at all. Nothing other than mental masturbation.
I really am beginning to think that woman is dumber than a bag of hammers and should change her last name to Jabberwockie…
Jefferson
January 27th, 2011
5:42 pm
Class warfare in the end, when push get to shove.
Jefferson
January 27th, 2011
5:43 pm
Cost Nick his job in 1917…
josef nix
January 27th, 2011
5:47 pm
Scout
vis a vis @ 3:11
That about sums it up. The Emancipation Proclamation is a masterwork of spin doctoring and anyone who has ever bothered to read the document can see that. You alluded to the Haitian revolution. As you may know, this is something I have been researching lately. The outplay of that as the American outplay of the French Revolution and the impact it had on our own foreign and domestic policies is one of those curious absences from the official history of Les Etats Unis! The other curious absentee from the analysis of the American story is the rejection of the slave revolt. I know there will be those who will bring up Denmark Vesey or Nat Turner and argue this, that or the other as to why they failed, but that the action had little appeal to the enslaved as the best way out of the chains is not factored in. In Louisiana where there were many more such actions and where the demographic and cultural conditions would have indicated success if pursued per the Haitian model, such was consistently rejected.
But Lincoln as the Great Emancipator is about the biggest crock of horsesh*t in American mythology…
Observer
January 27th, 2011
5:49 pm
Amvet @ 5:42,
There are some that take her seriously which says alot about our citizenry.
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:49 pm
Paul:
By the by…did ‘ya read this?
Axelrod: Obama still a ‘progressive,’ hasn’t moved to center
“I guarantee you, as God is my witness, we have not had a repositioning discussion here,” Axelrod said. “We have not talked about, ‘let’s move three degrees to the right.’ That’s not the way we view this.”
I was “shocked”. YOU?
Really, with friends like Axelrod, who needs enemies.
Any independents who run across THAT little gabfest will revert back to considering Obama, theirs.
One step forward, two steps back.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
5:50 pm
@@
Oh, I know… but it did make me smile.
marky mark
“Or how do you think the south is so full of military bases? Perhaps its because the Armed Forces subcommittee was full of southern democrats for 45 + years…..”
Not many people know we have an Air Force base in… Tennessee!
Story goes, Rep Al Gore Sr (believe he was on the Appropriations Committee at the time) heard the Truman Administration wanted to build an AF base for flight simulation testing (wind tunnels) his response was “Tell President Truman that’s a fine idea. Where in Tennessee would he like it built?”
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:52 pm
Oh, and Paul?
Have you ever seen me link to Raw Story? DebbieDoRight doesn’t approve. The only people I’ve seen link to Raw Story were jay’s left-wingers.
First time for me.
josef nix
January 27th, 2011
5:52 pm
md
Self sufficiency…as Hillbilly points out, some of us are still stuck in the 19th Century, but I think that’s where we took a wrong step and best go back and review it all from that point forward…
Scout
January 27th, 2011
5:52 pm
josef:
You would really enjoy “The Real Lincoln” by DeLorenzo.
A fascinating, easy read …….. couldn’t put it down.
Observer
January 27th, 2011
5:52 pm
Ok, I am done.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/compost/2011/01/wtf_moments_with_palin_on_the.html
Scout
January 27th, 2011
5:52 pm
P.S.
If you win the war …………. you get to write the history.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
5:53 pm
@@
Shocked at what? Axelrod’s ‘honesty’?
Yup.
Guess he’d say Pres Obama isn’t moving to the center, he’s just building consensus to move the country forward.
Personally, I don’t much care which direction people want to call it so long as we get policies that work.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
5:54 pm
@@
“First time for me.”
So…. how was it for you?
couldn’t resist….
josef nix
January 27th, 2011
5:55 pm
PAUL
The South is so full of military bases because it’s been under occupation for going on 150 years…
Scout
I’ve read the de Lorenzo…interesting….I don’t buy it all straight down the line, but he certainly makes some valid points…
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:56 pm
Glorious the first time and every time since.
Scout
January 27th, 2011
5:56 pm
“SNOWIEST JAN IN NYC HISTORY! ”
Ah ……………………….. nevermind.
Scout
January 27th, 2011
5:57 pm
josef:
Good.
Do you know there are two streets east of the Braves stadium named “Custer” and “Reno” ?
Sickening.
@@
January 27th, 2011
5:58 pm
Personally, I’d like to see ‘em shut down. It’ll give ‘em time to think. They ain’t doing to well with this thinkin’ on their feet approach.
Real American
January 27th, 2011
5:59 pm
jm: Tell that stupid remark to the little girl or the little boy who now can get treated for the cancer or heart problem without being turn away for pre condition.
Maybe if it happens to someone you know then it will be important, typical jerk conservative””
Curious Observer
January 27th, 2011
6:00 pm
But Lincoln as the Great Emancipator is about the biggest crock of horsesh*t in American mythology…
Amen! Lincoln himself said that if he could end the war without freeing the slaves, he would do that. The Emancipation Proclamation was purely a political and military ploy.
Scout
January 27th, 2011
6:00 pm
“While sources said the White House had serious interest in finding a woman to serve as the president’s top spokesperson, Carney “hit it out of the park” during the interview process.”
Ah ……………… isn’t that like “sexist” ?
I think it’s in violation of OPM regulations on hiring.
Pogo
January 27th, 2011
6:00 pm
What mileage is that Jay? If you had any introspection at all you would see that your own mileage is about a centimeter long, if that. Almost daily you pound out with much emphasis that taxes must increase but you never, ever talk about cutting the things that will have to be cut in order to allow us to continue to do business. Perhaps those “uneasy truths” about what will be required of us as a nation to continue to exist cut a little too close to home for those of the progressive mindset such as yourself. You are enslaved to your publisher and I can respect that because afterall they pay your bills but don’t even try to come across as someone who is open to any other train of thought other than the one that both you and your “boss” believe in. You may fool yourself into believing that you’re opened minded but your true self is revealed here on a daily basis way more than you even realize.
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
6:01 pm
Observer, there is a twofold aspect to her that is so shocking.
First I think she is still completely clueless as to any specifics or any actual concrete proposals/solutions for all of the things she speaks of.
To this day she reminds me of that interview with George Bush back in 2000, when he was asked to name various heads of state of major nations and he completely embarrassed himself. He may have gotten two out of ten right. It was really quite amazing to watch him demonstrate his stunning ignorance on such basic yet important knowledge. But as we all sadly know, it did not matter to this faithful followers and the agonizing Reign of Error ensued.
Secondly, as you noted, who would take that woman seriously???
It is a sad testament to the dumbing down of America…
barking frog
January 27th, 2011
6:02 pm
Paul
January 27th, 2011
5:50 pm
————————————————-
A friend of mine used to be a member of the GA
legislature and owned an auto parts store in a small
town in North GA. Through congressman John Davis
he obtain a supply contract for parts for 4 AF bases.
A defense contractor actually supplied the parts but
he got a check every month for his ‘part’. I’m sure this
type of thing goes on now. Not illegal.
Real American
January 27th, 2011
6:03 pm
Ronald Reagan, the Rep god, came in to office with trillion dollars in debt when he left it was 3 trillon, George W, I have to fight my daddy war, double the debt.
Where were the hypocrite Rep?
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:03 pm
The deficit doesn’t jump when tax rates are held the same, and that’s what happened with our President Bush’s tax rates–they did not change. So, you need to look elsewhere when playing your blame game.
Gordon
January 27th, 2011
6:07 pm
Is it unreasonable to have spending cuts first, given the government’s history of overspending? Taxes can go up after that. Giving the government more money to solve its overspending problem doesn’t seem like a good idea.
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:08 pm
“Congressional Republicans, of course, have no intention of allowing that to happen.”
———————
Jay, you seem to be implying that the “doc fix” is the Republicans problem. If that’s your intent, that’s pretty rich, considering that the “doc fix” was one of several bogus budget gimmicks the Idiot Messiah put in his health care power grab to make it look revenue neutral.
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:09 pm
Gordon, I’m with you 100%…do the tax cuts first before daring to pick our pockets for even more tax revenue.
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
6:11 pm
Is it unreasonable to have spending cuts first…?
Nope.
But…
WHERE?
josef nix
January 27th, 2011
6:11 pm
Insofar as the reasons behind the Emancipation Proclamation coming when it did…it was a pr move concocted in September of 1862 in relation to the international protests being raised at the highest levels in England, France, Prussia and Holland in reaction to the policies of the occupation authorities in New Orleans. Beast Butler’s Order #27 and his take over of the consulates had brought the threat of severing of relations with the Washington government and a recognition of the Richmond government. The matter of slavery had been at issue with these governments and had been primary in their earlier refusals to recognize Richmond. Efforts by Garre, de Leon, et al, to convince the Confederate government to make moves toward partial emacipation (i.e. those slaves and their families who would enlist in the Confederate forces) were beginning to gain traction and were receiving favorable response in the European power circles. Lincoln was told, fairly bluntly, that he better do something and do it quick. He did. It was the Emancipation Proclamation. It had its effect there, if not here.
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:14 pm
Where do the Democrats propose cutting? Other than defense, that’s pretty much a given for the party of “America Sucks”.
barking frog
January 27th, 2011
6:14 pm
I believe this year the US debt as a percentage of GDP
will be 100%.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
6:15 pm
josef nix
“The South is so full of military bases because it’s been under occupation for going on 150 years…”
LOLOL!
One would think you’d be used to it by now –
barking frog
Sounds like a small business set aside. Not only perfectly legal, there’s law and policies dealing with it. Lots of those big contractors/suppliers don’t make stuff – they just funnel it from other sources. In fact, many of the big guys need to show how much of their supplies come from small businesses. No reason it shouldn’t go to help the llittle guy who otherwise would be cut out.
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:15 pm
It’s close…the number I saw today was 95%.
Disgusted
January 27th, 2011
6:16 pm
You can talk about the need for compromise all you want, but both sides are playing a shell game. The deficit will never be erased if the emphasis stays purely on “discretionary” spending. That’s not where the big money is. And the use of that term implies that most of the spending is sacrosanct. If there’s no willingness even to talk about revenue enhancement or sharp reductions in such expenditures as agriculatural subsidies, oil subsidies, defense, etc., then there’s no hope of reducing the deficit. And Congress should stop using regular Medicare and SS as whipping boys. Those programs are supposed to be self-supporting. If there’s a need to raise the tax rate or the income limit or the age limit to fix them to be self-supporting, then do it. Don’t treat them as though they’re some kind of general welfare, and don’t pretend that taxes intended to support these programs aren’t being diverted to other purposes. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I see withholdings for SS and Medicare in my pay stub every pay period. The only reason SS and Medicare are being discussed as targets of reductions is that enemies of the programs have been extraordinarily successful in selling the BS that they are general welfare programs.
I’ll be frank and say that I don’t give a hoot about Medicare Part D. I pay premiums for that program every month, but I never draw a penny from it because my private insurance plan and its prescription subsidiary make it too troublesome even to try to submit Part D claims. The Part D program was never funded, and if it goes under, too bad. It’s just an enrichment source for Big Pharma and the insurance companies, particularly since it forbids the federal government from even negotiating drug prices.
Doggone/GA
January 27th, 2011
6:16 pm
“Not many people know we have an Air Force base in… Tennessee”
I don’t think that’s nearly as odd as having a Navy base in Albany, Ga (which I don’t thinks is there any more, but if it isn’t, it was)
@@
January 27th, 2011
6:16 pm
My post misappeared.
Until now, the protests have been distinctly secular, with few representatives of the country’s largest opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood. Whether it will stay that way after Friday is an open question. Those involved in organizing the protests say they hope their movement to oust Mubarak is not overtaken by a group that has said it wants to bring Islamic law to Egypt but is widely suspected of occasional complicity with the government.–WaPo
I hope that’s true and that the Western media hasn’t been duped again into supporting Islamic radicals.
jay’s left-wingers seem to be having a conversation among themselves about Palin. While it’s of no interest to me, she seems to be all they wanna talk about.
Blog on…and on…and on…and……
@@
January 27th, 2011
6:18 pm
‘Scuse me! I know how sensitive jay’s left-wingers are. Make that SOME of jay’s left-wingers–not ALL of jay’s left-wingers.
Glad I got that taken care of.
md
January 27th, 2011
6:18 pm
“Self sufficiency…”
I don’t think we have the necessary raw materials to do so………..unless folks really are ready to sacrifice……which doesn’t appear to be the case with all the entitlement programs………
Paul
January 27th, 2011
6:18 pm
Barry
“Where do the Democrats propose cutting? Other than defense, that’s pretty much a given for the party of “America Sucks”.”
Got any names of Congressional Democrats advocating Defense cuts?
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
6:20 pm
“While it’s of no interest to me…”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OstRBLG5n3c
“Gordon, I’m with you 100%…do the tax cuts first…”
But…
WHERE?
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:21 pm
Barney Frank proposes cutting defense 25%.
josef nix
January 27th, 2011
6:21 pm
Scout
my 6:11
That should be Gayarre, as in Charles Etiènne Arthur Gayarré. His papers are most interesting reading.
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:22 pm
Obozo proposes cutting defense 10%.
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:23 pm
The correct question is where WOULDN’T you cut?
Paul
January 27th, 2011
6:24 pm
Barry
Thank you! That’s great!
Doesn’t go far enough, though. There was a great American patriot, before he died (from the results of Agent Orange from Vietnam) he was at one time the youngest colonel in the Army and for years was the highest-decorated living vet, guy by the name of Colonel David Hackworth, who strongly advocated cutting the Defense budget in half. And, he showed how to do it.
And I don’t think he was a Democrat librul…..
Adam
January 27th, 2011
6:24 pm
jm: 5% of 85% is 4.25% of the whole. My math is not off, but it is based on my assumption that 85% is the rest of the budget when you cut out the 15 percent Jay is talking about. That’s not an unreasonable assumption, but I’m sure I’m not looking at the whole picture.
In any case I would prefer not to be personally insulted for being off on the math when I admitted it might be off in the first place.
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
6:24 pm
No spinning.
You’ve got the scissors.
The goal is $1,500,000,000,000.00.
@@
January 27th, 2011
6:24 pm
AmVet:
I was thinking Observer, but thanks for pointing out you, too, were involved.
schnirt
josef nix
January 27th, 2011
6:26 pm
PAUL
I guess you could get used to just about anything…still don’t mean you like it!
md
I think we do have the resources, we just lack the will to make those cuts and sacrifices you mention…
Paul
January 27th, 2011
6:26 pm
Barry
The Defense cut originated with SecDef Gates, and it’s not a one-year amount. I believe it’s spread over, what, ten years? It’s another of the Pentagon’s fun with numbers routines.
And I’ll stick my neck out and say it’s not a cut from this year’s baseline – it’s a cut based upon future program increases that haven’t even been funded yet.
Adam
January 27th, 2011
6:26 pm
Also kayaker, you’re right. There’s no real need for earmarks when we’re discussing anything that could be considered an entitlement program, and rarely is there a need for them in general. It may not be THE most important issue facing us, but putting a handle on earmarks and other spending, as well as being responsible with the tax code, is a good overall plan.
barking frog
January 27th, 2011
6:26 pm
It seems Harry Reid thinks Obama was wrong to promise
to veto any bill with earmarks and says its a power grab.
A democrat rebellion could easily sway the balance of
power to give Republicans a stronger foothold.
Adam
January 27th, 2011
6:27 pm
barking frog: Harry Reid is hardly a spearhead for a rebellion lol
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:27 pm
If I were doing the cutting, there wouldn’t be any problem getting Americans to do the jobs Americans won’t do.
Real American
January 27th, 2011
6:28 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout :Obozo: One of many Georgia Hicks that have no respect for the office of the President.
This is why we can not move to the 21st century and compete, and the world is passing us by, we have to many un Americans in this country.
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:29 pm
Yeah, remind me who Gates works for?
Adam
January 27th, 2011
6:29 pm
I’m waiting for someone to pick apart Obama’s statement that other countries “don’t have this problem” when it comes to getting things done. OMG HE WANTS TO BE A DICTATOR. Nevermind the context.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
6:30 pm
Barry,
Yup, SecDef Gates proposed the cuts over five years.
His Republican supporters? The Congressional Tea Partiers.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hhro2MhndFpx09q5ci3qZlczKJJg?docId=ba6bf98a76c6464585836f95f69b7b85
Lil' Barry Bailout
January 27th, 2011
6:31 pm
Real, I respect the office, not the current occupant. Big difference.
And I’m pretty sure I’m not the reason we “can’t compete” in the world, as I personally do business in Europe, Asia, and South America. By the way, what I see there (people who don’t mind working for a living) makes me very worried about OUR future.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
6:32 pm
Barry
While SecDef Gates works for Pres Obama, it’s not at all unusual for departments to independently work their own solutions to what they see as impending problems. They describe it in terms like “get ahead of the problem.”
barking frog
January 27th, 2011
6:32 pm
I have an idea. cut medicare completely and move it
to medicaid where it will be fully needs based. cut the
drug program entirely as medicaid will cover the needy.
should be worth around 500 billion. And give the medicare
tax back to the wage earners.
Real American
January 27th, 2011
6:35 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout : Figures you have more respect for the last President, who got 4500 of our soldiers dead, and double the debt.
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
6:36 pm
So far Barry, you are at $0.00.
Better get busy! Your still 1.5 trill short…
Adam
January 27th, 2011
6:37 pm
AmVet: Is that “You fix the budget” thing still up?
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
6:38 pm
Paul, from tha tlink:
The military budget would still be $553 billion in the next fiscal year, close to double the 2001 total, and that amount does not include funds for the war in Afghanistan and reduced operations in Iraq.
WOO HOO!
It’s only DOUBLE what it was ten years ago!
Party, party, party…
@@
January 27th, 2011
6:39 pm
Looks to me like some Tea Partiers are willing to cut military spending.
Military spending has created divisions within Republicans ranks, with some tea party-backed lawmakers favoring deep cuts.
They’re going thru the haggling process. I’m thinking Republicans will be forced to make cuts in military spending. Don’t know what we’ll do with those workers helping fulfill contracts though. Where are they gonna find a job?
AmVet
January 27th, 2011
6:39 pm
Adam, Sorry I don’t follow…
stands for decibels
January 27th, 2011
6:39 pm
Just take a look at what’s happening to Greece,
I would’ve shut it off there, if I’d been bothering to watch.
Adam
January 27th, 2011
6:41 pm
AmVet: There was a poll-like “you fix the budget” thing on a news website once and the results were issued a couple of weeks after it was shown. It allowed users to adjust the national budget to their liking to see if it would cause a deficit or surplus.
Paul
January 27th, 2011
6:42 pm
AmVet
Ab-so-lutely mindnumbingly amazing, ain’t it?