Two budget fights loom — one that matters, and one that doesn’t
The looming budget fight in Washington has two components, the short term and the long term. And it’s important to keep that distinction in mind as events play out.
The short term is going to be brutal. House Republicans are itching for a spending fight, and they’re going to get one. The occasion might be passage of the continuing resolution needed to fund the rest of this fiscal year; it might be the debate over raising the debt ceiling; it might be both. The House GOP is proposing budget moves they know won’t be accepted — a 29 percent cut in the hated EPA, eliminating funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and Americorps and slashing college tuition aid while defense spending increases — but they show every sign of stamping their feet and throwing a major hissy fit if the rest of Washington doesn’t bow to their every wish.
The damage those cuts would do is serious. But in terms of the deficit, the short-term fight will mean nothing and accomplish nothing. By concentrating on non-defense discretionary spending, which accounts for just 12 to 18 percent of federal spending depending on how you define it, the short-term battle sidesteps entitlements, defense or taxes, which means it doesn’t address the deficit at all. Its sole impact will be to strengthen or weaken the political position of the various participants as they prepare for the longer game.
That’s where the money is, and where the change will come. For the first time, we’re seeing signs from President Obama and congressional leaders of both parties that they’re willing to work toward a grand compromise. To his credit, U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia is reportedly playing a major role in leading a bipartisan, behind-the-scenes discussion in the Senate in which all ideas — entitlements, taxes, defense — are on the table.
Let’s breeze through the major areas of concern:
1.) Saving Social Security is relatively easy. You don’t have to privatize it, you don’t have to slash it. The president’s bipartisan deficit commission laid out a common-sense approach of reductions in long-term benefit increases combined with slight increases in SSI taxes to make the program actuarially sound. Remember, the maximum Social Security benefit for someone retiring this year at age 66 is barely $28,000, so any effort to slash that is going to hit a lot of vulnerable people very hard.
2.) Medicare, on the other hand, is relatively impossible. We’ve got a health-care delivery system that already spends twice as much of our national GDP as any other industrialized country, and we’ve got large numbers of Baby Boomers about to retire over the next decade. That’s a hugely expensive combination.
The House GOP approach to Medicare is essentially to abandon it, converting the program to vouchers that senior citizens can use to buy health insurance on their own. However, those vouchers would be scheduled to diminish in value over time, leaving seniors to somehow pay their own medical bills. The numbers just don’t work, and the impact of that approach on seniors’ access to health care would be far more devastating than the imaginary death panels could ever have been.
Somehow, you’ve got to lower health-care delivery costs not just in Medicare but throughout the health-care system. (Doing it in Medicare alone is impossible.) You’ve also got to means-test benefits to a degree and raise taxes if necessary to cover what’s left. You can’t “solve” Medicare, but you can certainly contain it.
3.) Defense spending also has to be cut. Everyone knows it, although some refuse to acknowledge it. You cannot sustain a globally dominant military without a globally dominant economy, and if you try to do so, you weaken your economy still further. Today, we lack the means to permanently finance a military establishment that spends as much money as the rest of the world combined on defense. Those days are over.
4.) Taxes have to go up. We have to trash the nonsensical idea that tax cuts pay for themselves, because they don’t. Taxes aren’t too high — as a percentage of national GDP, they’re lower now than they’ve been in decades. If we simply allow the Bush tax cuts to expire as now scheduled in 2012, taxes as a percentage of GDP would still be at or below the historical average since 1970.
Those are the raw ingredients of a deal: Entitlement cuts, spending cuts, defense cuts and tax increases. How much of each will be a matter of negotiation and sometimes bitter political gamesmanship, but without all four components, no deal is possible and we’ll continue right off the cliff.
– 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
489 comments Add your comment
jm
February 16th, 2011
10:43 am
Obama’s plan: don’t cut spending, or to close the deficit, tax the wealthy, even though that won’t truly solve it. The guy is the penultimate politician.
Spend more on his stuff, no tax increases for my voters, but tax increases for all the other guys voters. What has happened to this country? We’ve come a long ways since Kennedy’s “ask not what your country can do for you” days…. we’ve come a long ways in the wrong direction.
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:43 am
“Uh-oh…. Pres Obama’s going to get kicked out of the Socialist Society”
that’s okay … he’s the secretary / treasurer of the muslim brotherhood (knows the secret handshake and EVERYthing)
Mick
February 16th, 2011
10:44 am
ragnar
Why don’t we end all wars? Let’s face it, we’re broke..
jt
February 16th, 2011
10:44 am
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:30 am
jt – for it to be effect, it needs to be pithier than that … yours barely makes any sense.
Thanks for the constructive crit.
How is this.
“Fools have no interest in good government: they only want ignore their local communities, their local homeless and hungry children, and other local problems, and instead,…. send their money into a black-hole Washington cess-pool where it will used by corrupt politicians to buy votes in order to maintain their respective power, at the same time , these same fools want to COMPLAIN when no problems are solved, they are fleeced out of their hard earned money,and their respective standard of living is diminished along with their personal wealth,.”. Comman Sense,101 , jt.
Is that pithy enough?
I will admit, there is no shortage of R&D Federalie worshipping fools, but …………the evidence is clear.
The majority of freedom-loving americans are catching on.
As is the world.(especially the Mid-east.).
So be it.
Left wing management
February 16th, 2011
10:44 am
Paul Ryan — the Mohammad Atta of thinking-man’s conservatives (and vying to replace George Will).
Adam
February 16th, 2011
10:44 am
jm: We’ve come a long ways since Kennedy’s “ask not what your country can do for you” days
That’s right. Ask what you can do for your country. You know, like PAYING TAXES.
TaxPayer
February 16th, 2011
10:44 am
“In the last two years, under President Obama, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs,” Mr. Boehner told reporters. “If some of those jobs are lost, so be it. We’re broke.”
Well, I’m in favor of no more surges into middle eastern countries too. Bring the troops home.
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:44 am
10:42 – dum … dum … dum … dum da-dum …. dum da-dum ….
AmVet
February 16th, 2011
10:44 am
Here is the implication with reigning in the hyper-corrupt, uber-wasteful and staggeringly bloated DoD budget.
It would put a huge dent in the vast amount of annual corporate welfare and income redistribution UP the economic ladder.
And as is widely known, the fiscal conservatives (LMAO) are only hyper-focused on redistribution down the ladder. To the Cadillac-driving, welfare queens.
Instead of the even sleazier, spoon fed, corporate welfare kings…
Doggone/GA
February 16th, 2011
10:45 am
“We’ve come a long ways since Kennedy’s “” days…. we’ve come a long ways in the wrong direction.”
We have. Now Kennedy might say “ask not what your country can do for you, except those who can best afford it – them we give a pass”
RW-(the original)
February 16th, 2011
10:45 am
it would bring nondefense discretionary spending to the lowest level since Eisenhower
Paul,
That’s only true if an exceedingly absurd set of assumptions in the Obama budget outline all turn out to be accurate. There’s probably a better chance of closing the budget gap through the sale of Unicorns being raised in Michelle’s garden.
jm
February 16th, 2011
10:45 am
SoCo 10:42 – there’s no such thing as a lockbox…. its not possible and doesn’t exist. Once the money is in the government’s hands, they are free to spend it as they see fit by law and by principle. If you want retirement savings, don’t depend on the government for them. They must be put under individual control, not the government’s.
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:45 am
jt – I think you need to look up the word “pithy”
dictionary.com is your friend
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
10:45 am
The current budget crisis should be laid at the feet of the administrations responsible for it…….the Reagan and GWB administrations
larry
February 16th, 2011
10:46 am
“In the last two years, under President Obama, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs,” Mr. Boehner told reporters. “If some of those jobs are lost, so be it. We’re broke.”
Actually, the federal government has only added 58,000 new jobs over the last two years. He’s lying again. I wonder what is in those cigs he smokes.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/feb/15/john-boehner/john-boehner-says-200000-new-federal-jobs-have-spr/
TaxPayer
February 16th, 2011
10:46 am
jm needs a new brown bag to breath in and out of. The one he has been using appears to have blown out.
Doggone/GA
February 16th, 2011
10:47 am
“Once the money is in the government’s hands, they are free to spend it as they see fit by law ”
Yep. That’s why they have to BORROW from the SS funds. Because they cannot spend it on anything BUT SS.
Adam
February 16th, 2011
10:48 am
jm: It is ok to put more than one thought in a single post so you don’t end up being 5 out of the last 10 posts.
Intown
February 16th, 2011
10:48 am
The hardest thing for Americans to let go of may be the idea that we are responsible for providing security for the entire globe. It will require shifting American foreign policy and the very idea of what America has been since 1945 — either one of two superpowers or the lone superpower in the world. Is your average American ready to swallow his/her pride and acknowledge the multi-polar world in which we now live — where economic might and soft power is as important as military might? It is hard to fathom.
Russ555
February 16th, 2011
10:48 am
Dudley – Ronnie is dead and W is not interested. Go to plan B. We can cut down on ss and use England’s plan for medicine – two asprin and stiff upper lip. And plenty of morphine for those really sick.
Granny Godzilla
February 16th, 2011
10:49 am
Some light reading from TPM…
At a press conference yesterday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) told reporters that if some federal jobs were lost as a result of his proposed spending cuts, “so be it.”
How many jobs are we talking about? According to federal budget expert Scott Lilly at the Center for American Progress, Boehner’s proposed spending cuts could kill almost 1 million jobs.
Lilly ran the numbers for Dana Milbank of the Washington Post:
using the usual multipliers, [Lilly] calculated that the cuts – a net of $59 billion in the last half of fiscal 2011 – would lead to the loss of 650,000 government jobs, and the indirect loss of 325,000 more jobs as fewer government workers travel and buy things. That’s nearly 1 million jobs – possibly enough to tip the economy back into recession.Milbank additionally notes that Boehner’s spending plan includes some $450 million for the development of a second engine for the F-35 Joint Striker — which is done in a GE plant in Boehner’s district that employs 7,000 people. Lilly wrote Sunday that, despite Boehner’s promises to end earmarks, the job-saving money for the engine’s development looks a lot like an earmark.
Doggone/GA
February 16th, 2011
10:49 am
“Is your average American ready to swallow his/her pride and acknowledge the multi-polar world in which we now live — where economic might and soft power is as important as military might”
I think a LOT of “average” Americans ARE…the problem is getting our POLITICIANS to understand that.
jm
February 16th, 2011
10:49 am
As Landreiu said, Federal Debt is the issue of the century. It does not appear to me that current occupants of the various offices have the fortitude to tackle the problem and behave responsibly, with a combination of tax (revenue, not rate) increases and spending cuts.
Ergo, I will be sad to see the ship go down if it does. But I do not intend to be on it if it does go down. Buy your life preservers now at RBC or TBT.
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:49 am
larry – and I’ll bet a lot of those are in homeland security … will he be willing to let THOSE jobs go???
but … but … but … THE BORDER!!!
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
10:52 am
Russ
Just talking about long term effects of policies
thomas
February 16th, 2011
10:52 am
odd people address the what you can do for your country, as in pay taxes and such but not a word for those asking what the country can do for you.
People should pay their taxes and they should be able to claim deduction for giving to charity as well, as a donation to charity is helping the nation as a whole.
But we also need far fewer people asking the country to do for them.
Paul
February 16th, 2011
10:53 am
jm
As a general principle, I’ve said “Happens on your watch, you get the credit or blame.”
That’s general. There are circumstances to consider.
In this case, it’s the nature of the federal budget cycle. Pres Obama had no real choice but to sign the budget. If the Executive and Legislative had done their jobs, Pres Obama would have entered office with a signed budget underway. But the Executive and Legislative didn’t do their jobs. They kept passing CRAs to keep things moving. Then, months and months late, they passed the budget and Pres Obama signed it.
Given the circumstances, did he have any choice but to sign it?
It’s not about ‘blame’ but ‘responsibility.’ I think it fundamentally inaccurate to say “in FY09 Pres Obama delivered a deficit of $1.8 trillion.” It’s more accurate to say “Pres Obama took office in January 2009, more than three months after the fiscal year began. The budget was prepared by the previous administration. Meaningful changes midway thru the year were not possible. A combination of the the spending and revenue processes put forth by Pres Bush, along with actual events in the ensuing months, led to a deficit of $N trillion. During this year, the Obama Administration began to revise the FY2010 Budget Plan, which had itself been underway for months. jm, the first ‘full’ year of Pres Obama’s budget? FY 2010? That had been underway ( (guidance to agencies, requests from agencies to OMB) since… are you ready? Early 2008!
Mick,
Nah, that IBM computer’s thumb is too fast -
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 16th, 2011
10:54 am
I my have to upgrade my view of our senior senator – sounds like he is working with Coburn.
“President Barack Obama defended his budget proposal Tuesday against criticism that it was too timid, as a bipartisan group of senators moved on their own to address the long-term spending issues the White House budget ducked.
…
“The president called Medicare and Medicaid the biggest drivers of long-term deficit growth. And he said his bipartisan debt commission’s plan “still provides a framework for discussion,” even though his budget did not pick up most of its recommendations.
“Meantime, the center of gravity for addressing long-term federal budget issues appeared to have moved to the Senate.
“Six senators—three Democrats and three Republicans—hope to finish converting the debt commission’s recommendations into legislative language, according to Senate aides and a lawmaker involved with the process.
“Sen. Mark Warner (D., Va.), one of the group’s leaders, said in an interview a framework of the bill will be brought before a group of 25 senators after the Presidents Day recess to decide whether to bring it to the Senate floor for debate or break it into smaller pieces.
…
“So far, White House officials have offered no assistance, Senate aides said Tuesday. “They’re taking a step back and seeing how this shakes out,” said one Democratic Senate aide.
“Other senators leading the effort were Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois and Kent Conrad of North Dakota, and Republicans Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Mike Crapo of Idaho and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia.
” ‘This budget is a missed opportunity,’ House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R., Mich.) said at a hearing Tuesday. ‘There is nothing on entitlement reform, and there is little more than lip service about getting the deficit under control.’ “
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:54 am
“they should be able to claim deduction for giving to charity as well”
um. unless things have changed in the last 5 years, you can claim a deduction for giving to charity
jt
February 16th, 2011
10:55 am
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:45 am
jt – I think you need to look up the word “pithy”
dictionary.com is your friend
Okay let me try this.
“Those that have faith in the Federal government to do what is right,
are on a one way street,
and they ain’t coming back”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xv24N8H1KyI
The russkis and the chinese know this.
Mick
February 16th, 2011
10:55 am
My parents grew up in the great depression. They taught me well about wants and needs. This country made it back from that calamity and we can make it back from this one. In some ways this will be tougher because there is a mindset that gov’t is the problem. That’s too simple a statement and incorrect. Our gov’t can be used by the people to chart a proper course. After 30 years of tax cutting look at the mess we have got in 49 states. Taxes for the services we want need to be adjusted and make sure we get the most bang for a buck. I’m ready to do my part,for the greater good..
Doggone/GA
February 16th, 2011
10:55 am
“But we also need far fewer people asking the country to do for them.”
Wellll…here’s a thought: if big businesses would, for the good of the country, sacrifice SOME of their short-term profit gains to hire a few extra people, there would BE fewer people asking for the country to “do for them”
And the money they would help circulate through the economny would have a great effect on helping the economy to recover, which would mean jobs for even more people – who also would no longer need the country to “do for them”
Common Sense isn't very Common
February 16th, 2011
10:55 am
Unplug the terminally ill (brain dead?)
That seems to fit fully 50% of the tribe.
They can pick their own family members to unplug
Matti
February 16th, 2011
10:56 am
The House GOP is proposing budget moves they know won’t be accepted
Of course! Y’all didn’t think they actually intended to accomplish anything while that you-know-what still occupies the White House, did you? How would they play the VICTIM card, wailing and gnashing their teeth that they’re TRYING to fix things but these eeeeeeeevil Dems won’t LET them, if they actually worked together to accomplish something?
Much more fun to cry “Oh, boo hoo! Please please please make those eeeevil Dems go away next year so they can finally do something right!” They promise to propose something workable AFTER they return the government to one party rule like they had through most of the last decade when everything was friggin AWESOME here in the Utopian States of America.
Personal responsibility? Not when there are elected Democrats to blame!!!
Russ555
February 16th, 2011
10:57 am
Dudley – I knew that – but added my comment anyway.
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
10:58 am
Personally, I think that if the money ain’t in your pocket, or bank account, to cover the purchase, then you can’t afford it
Paul
February 16th, 2011
10:58 am
RW-(the original)
I haven’t verified the numbers (Eisenhower spending as percent of GDP) myself. Was just operating under the principle of “never let a good straight line go to waste.”
I’ve a feeling, though, given the growth in GDP we’ve experienced over the last decadeS, that it’s probably about ballpark correct.
Rightwing Troll
February 16th, 2011
10:58 am
” America won’t last with such a miserable excuse for a “leader”.”
Now now… we made it through 2000 to 2008 didn’t we?
WOODSTOCK MIKE
February 16th, 2011
10:59 am
The simple issue is when the government creates jobs by opening up new agencies, new departments, etc… those new agencies are very difficult to ever get rid of. So, now we are at a point where there is not enough money coming in to maintain these new agencies. See this is where big government becomes a problem. Now, you hear people whining because if we cut spending jobs will be lost. Ummm, if there is no money to pay for these jobs what do you suggest be done?? Just keep paying for them and digging the whole deeper. That doesn’t sound like the best option.
And Jay Bookman seems to have it all figured out, I think he needs to take his ideas to Washington because after reading this article it seems quite simple to fix the problems, LOL!!
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
11:00 am
jt – you’re close … maybe if it was a one-way street to DisappointmentLand …
however, when you loop in the chinese and the russians, you’re losing the plot – particularly when you look at China’s 9.3% GDP in 2010
AmVet
February 16th, 2011
11:00 am
Any and all attempts to correct the massive mistakes of the past fifty years are decades off.
The primary reason being that most Republicans still intellectually live 50 years in the past.
So for them, the memo that they already lost the the war of social upheavals in the 1960s is just now getting to them.
They exist in a kind of political black hole where time and matter are distorted. And Joe McCarthy is still slaying commies.
And, we the people are royally screwed by their myopic inertia.
OK, off to keep the plutocrats comfy.
Later peeps…
Ragnar Danneskjöld
February 16th, 2011
11:00 am
Dear Mick @ 10:44, “Why don’t we end all wars? Let’s face it, we’re broke..” Your observation, that war is expensive, is undoubtedly true. Surrendering freedom is always cheaper than preserving it.
There are always enslavers out there, people who will steal our freedom one piece at a time. I think it undoubtedly true that “peace” and “freedom” are mutually exclusive, that one can have one or the other, but not both for any extended period of time.
Nice Guy
February 16th, 2011
11:00 am
“I’m ready to do my part,for the greater good..”
Well, Mick, you’re free to stroke a check any ‘ol time you want. Here, this is the site where you too can help pay down the nation’s debt.
http://www.pay.gov
Thanks in advance.
thomas
February 16th, 2011
11:01 am
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
10:54 am
Did the newest proposal not call for a reduction in the amount that could be claimed, only by the wealthy?
If not my apologies for including it.
If i am correct about that, do you think it is a good thing to take away an incentive for those with money to give as much as they want or can to those in need?
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
11:01 am
Matt @ 10:56
That’s funny as h3ll
Nice Guy
February 16th, 2011
11:02 am
Doggone – “sacrifice SOME of their short-term profit gains to hire a few extra people”
If there is a true need for an extra warm body, a busniess will hire that person. If not, that business risks further growth and quality product.
jm
February 16th, 2011
11:03 am
“Given the circumstances, did he have any choice but to sign it?”
Not much of one, but clearly he has no qualms about plenty of spending. Things to do. Have fun in the sandbox folks.
Mary Elizabeth
February 16th, 2011
11:04 am
Southern Comfort @ 10:06
“Personally, I don’t think health care should be a for-profit area, as I think it’s morally wrong to try to make a profit based on the wellness or sickness of a person.”
————————————————————————————–
I agree. I believe both health care and education, should be, basically, non-profit.
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
11:07 am
Mary
If health care and education were non-profit, we would quickly find out how many educators and Drs were really in it for the money or job security
TnGelding
February 16th, 2011
11:08 am
A good start on that somehow would be to adopt healthy lifestyle choices. It wouldn’t hurt if the health care providers would stop ripping us off, as well. I’ve never met anyone on Medicaid that wasn’t taking 5 or 6 prescription drugs.
The GOP is just blustering. They know the cuts aren’t going to pass the Senate or the president’s veto pen. Spending has to be reduced carefully over a number of years to give the economy time to adjust to the new realities. And we’re all going to have to start paying taxes and stop talking on the phone 24/7.
RW-(the original)
February 16th, 2011
11:08 am
Paul,
That ballpark would have to dwarf the new place in Texas, maybe even dwarf Texas itself, but I’ll hope for the best.
Off to the forest.
See y’all later
WOODSTOCK MIKE
February 16th, 2011
11:09 am
US GDP 2010 – 14.8 TRILLION
CHINA GDP 2010 – 5.88 TRILLION
TnGelding
February 16th, 2011
11:09 am
The profit has to come out of the health insurers. Medicare for all! It ain’t that good, but at least it provides minimum coverage.
Southern Comfort (B.P.O.I.B.W.)
February 16th, 2011
11:09 am
These quotes may restore my faith in Congress:
“In the last two years, under President Obama, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs,” Mr. Boehner told reporters. “If some of those jobs are lost, so be it. We’re broke.”
Restoring faith on lies….. Doesn’t surprise me at all….
Mick
February 16th, 2011
11:10 am
nice guy
You are either a real dum head ding a ling or not. If we don’t act collectively as opposed to individually, me sending in an extra check accomplishes nothing. You know, shared sacrifice? or is it that you got yours and everybody can go —- themselves?
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:11 am
Ragnar: Your observation, that war is expensive, is undoubtedly true. Surrendering freedom is always cheaper than preserving it.
Two sentences that have absolutely nothing to do with one another.
thomas
February 16th, 2011
11:11 am
Doggone/GA
February 16th, 2011
10:55 am
Thats your theory and you have no facts to show that it would indeed work that way. But you must be right it is those aweful rich business owners fault, none of the blame falls to the american worker.
Here’s an idea!
Stop spending your whole damn day here. Go do something productive and start your own sucessful corporation and YOU can start to hire all of these people and see if your theory works. Or you can stay here and tell everyone what we should do, instead of going out and actually making a difference. I mean I’m sure Jay loves it. But his is about the only economy you are helping. 12-15 hrs here you must be sooo productive elsewhere!
You can continue to pick at each statement I make again today, but it will be a one way street as you showed yourself to be a flat out liar two days ago, accusing me of things i never did or said to you, and i try real hard to stay away from conversing with dishonest people unless i have to.
It is the people of your sort, that just make it hard to come here and interact day after day as your negativity and intolerance for anything different than you just becomes too much.
So you have a nice day now and smile and breath, its not always everyone elses fault!
TnGelding
February 16th, 2011
11:11 am
WOODSTOCK MIKE
February 16th, 2011
11:09 am
Thanks for that. It should hush some of the gloom and doomers. And the federal government still owns most of its own debt.
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
11:11 am
TnGelding
Good point @ 11:59
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:12 am
thomas: Go do something productive and start your own sucessful corporation and YOU can start to hire all of these people and see if your theory works.
You first.
Southern Comfort (B.P.O.I.B.W.)
February 16th, 2011
11:13 am
there’s no such thing as a lockbox…. its not possible and doesn’t exist.
It is possible and only does not exist because the jackasses we continually elect refuse to do so. If the US Chamber of Commerce can bring in domestic and foreign funds, and separate them so that foreign money was not used to fund campaign ads, then SS money can be separated and used for that sole purpose. All you need is a competent accountant or two.
Paul
February 16th, 2011
11:13 am
RW-(the original)
Regarding “and bring annual domestic spending to its lowest share of the economy since Dwight Eisenhower.”
True, the planned budgets have assumptions. Haven’t got to the ‘annual DOMESTIC’ spending chart yet, but looking at overall, even inflating the assumptions, it’s not far off of Eisenhower.
Regardless of that, isn’t the real message “We’ve had a couple of crises. We’ve taken temporary measure to stop the bleeding and stabilize the economy. It was horribly expensive. But now that we’re getting out of that, this level of spending will not continue. We’ll get on track with my original plan, to set new priorities, shift spending from historical areas to new areas and keep spending to the low levels we saw fifty years ago.”
Put that way, it sounds rather Reaganesque, doesn’t it?
Paul
February 16th, 2011
11:14 am
RW-(the original)
sorry, forgot the link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2009/pdf/hist.pdf
The Thin Guy
February 16th, 2011
11:14 am
As an example of budgetary buffoonery The Regime wants to spend $ 200 million (billion) (trillion) on Choo Choo Trains.
http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/02/biden-vows-to-jump-canyon-by-amtrak.html
Please eliminate all funding for NPR, PBS, The National Endowment for Trash, and teleprompter maintenance. We need new sources of funds other than raising taxes on those of us who work for a living. Sell the National Parks to Disney. Legalize prostitution, drugs, gambling, gladiator competitions, duels, bull and bear fights, and pin the tail on the journalist. And let’s raffle off Jug Ear’s Birth Certificate.
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
11:14 am
Paul
It sure does
thomas
February 16th, 2011
11:16 am
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:12 am
Aww, are you doggone’s grand son?
Cute!
BTW I have done exactly that in my short life.
Didn’t like the stress and I only had 4 employees.
But excellent pre-pubescent retort.
Call me something now so I can say ………
“I’m rubber and your glue, everything you say bounces off of me and sticks to you”
jt
February 16th, 2011
11:17 am
USinUK—
“particularly when you look at China’s 9.3% GDP ”
easy to do with slave labor.
I will try one more time.
“The adequatly fed and entertained sheep will be shorned as necessary”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpkGvk1rQBI
Australians are lucky.
Their Federalism is alive and doing well.
They never had a Lincoln tyrant to enslave ALL.
jm
February 16th, 2011
11:18 am
Soco 11:13 – um, no. unless you prohibited the “lockbox” from purchasing US Treasuries, Agencies, Muni’s, etc.. Then, and only then would you start to have something semi-safe.
RW-(the original)
February 16th, 2011
11:18 am
Paul,
It actually sounds like a load of hooey so it’s worthy of any good politician. (I won’t mention that in your speech you both cut spending and also still spent the money by shifting priorities…oops, just did)
So what office are you running for?
Gotta scoot though. Wish I could stay for that good point TnG is going to make at 11:59 according to Dudley’s crystal ball.
Later
USinUK
February 16th, 2011
11:19 am
thomas – I might be wrong, but I think that was an old proposal that was jettisoned (like I said, I’m not sure – so if anyone knows the latest and greatest, feel free to bat me about the head with it)
Nice Guy
February 16th, 2011
11:19 am
Mick –
Hey man, you’re the whose ready to do your part, so why wait for Pres-BO to pass anything. Come’on ding a ling, get’ta writin’ that check.
WOODSTOCK MIKE
February 16th, 2011
11:20 am
@TnGelding
No prob, I just want to be clear that the US is far and away the highest producing country in the world and I am so tired of hearing all this doom and gloom, mainly from the left about how terrible the US has become. Quit whining and how about getting up and doing something about it? I can tell you one simple fact, adding to government and increasing spending is no way to get yourself out of a deficit if that’s what your concerned with and that seems to be the hot topic in Washington these days. If your mentality is that the govt will take care of you good luck with that!!
Southern Comfort (B.P.O.I.B.W.)
February 16th, 2011
11:20 am
jm
As I said. LEGISLATION!! And then quit electing jackasses.
Mick
February 16th, 2011
11:20 am
**Sell the National Parks to Disney. Legalize prostitution, drugs, gambling, gladiator competitions, duels, bull and bear fights, and pin the tail on the journalist. And let’s raffle off Jug Ear’s Birth Certificate.
Wow, now that’s both creative and enlightening, way to go..
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:21 am
thomas: You stick around here too. What makes your input more valuable than anyone else who does the same?
The Thin Guy @ 11:14am, all I had to do was read “Choo Choo Trains” and keep scrolling. That’s a Glen Beck taking point and it’s stupid. High speed rail is a GOOD thing. NPR and PBS are GOOD things. So you want to remove funding for any type of public transportation or non-profit media? You want the electorate to stay at home, sit down, shut up, and not get any information from anywhere, is what it sounds like. You know, I think Iran does crap like that. And that’s a dictatorship. You don’t want this country to be a dictatorship do you?
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
11:21 am
Sorry folks. I meant 11:09
Mick
February 16th, 2011
11:22 am
nice guy
Freedom isn’t free, and you aren’t nice or very smart for that matter..
Dudley (you're just jealous cause the voices ain't talking to you)
February 16th, 2011
11:22 am
Brain cramps today
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:23 am
Dudley: Brain cramps today
Conservabots have that affect on people.
Paul
February 16th, 2011
11:24 am
RW-(the original)
have a good one –
back to my taxes…..
jm
February 16th, 2011
11:24 am
Soco11:13 – basically, you’d have to prohibit the US government from investing in the US, since there are restrictions on government ownership of private companies in the US, justifiably so. So then you have to invest outside the US to keep the money away from our spending politicians. Which means you are then giving it to other spendthrift governments, or you have to invest it in their companies, which is equally unpopular as it is here, sovereign funds don’t work well.
Sooooooooooooooo back to – individual control of the asset investments. Very frickin simple actually. But the boogeyman democrats like to scare everyone into believing the Republicans will screw you and you’ll lose all your money even though there are plenty of safeguards. Damn Dems.
TaxPayer
February 16th, 2011
11:24 am
Why are Republicans so quick to volunteer others to write checks to pay down the debt that they whine about being too big and not something to be passed on to the next generation. I think Republicans just like to whine.
jm
February 16th, 2011
11:25 am
Soco “LEGISLATION!! ” does not create a lockbox.
jm
February 16th, 2011
11:27 am
National debt, going up in smoke. You can watch it live…. and even profit from it if you so desire.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=TBT+Basic+Chart&t=6m
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:29 am
TaxPayer: Nevermind that if other people DID write those checks, it would not change anything. They would still whine about how their OWN tax dollars, which they will have effectively contributed less of, are being used improperly. It’s a perpetual goal post movement argument. As soon as you overcome one objection, there’s another, and another, and another. Eventually those objections become stupid, and THEN they become talking points that everyone believes with religious fervor are the new answer to everything.
Examples:
- I have a right to have a stupid opinion and you can’t criticize me because free speech
- We can’t repeal DADT because ECONOMY
- Short form isn’t good enough because OBAMA has one
Doggone/GA
February 16th, 2011
11:29 am
“If there is a true need for an extra warm body, a busniess will hire that person. If not, that business risks further growth and quality product”
Funny! When *I* say that I get told I don’t know anything about how businesses operate. But I did say “for the good of the COUNTRY”
Hmmmmmmm
February 16th, 2011
11:30 am
Taxes have to go up. We have to trash the nonsensical idea that tax cuts pay for themselves, because they don’t. Taxes aren’t too high — as a percentage of national GDP, they’re lower now than they’ve been in decades. If we simply allow the Bush tax cuts to expire as now scheduled in 2012, taxes as a percentage of GDP would still be at or below the historical average since 1970.
Spoken like a true LIBERAL……. Nonsensical……. That’s funny….
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:30 am
- Tax cuts are good because SURPLUS
- Tax cuts are good because INCREASE REVENUE
- Tax cuts are good because ECONOMY
- Surplus never existed, except if I want tax cuts.
Nice Guy
February 16th, 2011
11:32 am
“Freedom isn’t free, and you aren’t nice or very smart for that matter..”
Someone get Mick some saltines and a coke. He seems delirious.
MPercy
February 16th, 2011
11:32 am
Jay: “If we simply allow the Bush tax cuts to expire as now scheduled in 2012,”
Will that be “for everyone” or will we carve out a way to squeeze more out of the “rich” only?
As I recall, the figure bandied about for the “cost” of extended the Bush tax cuts for the “rich” would cost around $700B over 10 years (about $70B/year), but that the cost for extending them for everyone else was $3.1T over 10 years (or about $310B/year).
kinglaura
February 16th, 2011
11:34 am
My wife and two children and I live in the state of Illinois. Our current health insurance plan is a Choice Plan that is provided by Wise Health Insurance. The plan itself is a consumer driven health care plan.
@@
February 16th, 2011
11:34 am
Other than my own, I have difficulties in grasping a budget so “OUT-RAGE-US”.
House Dem: White House energy cuts would ‘literally freeze’ people
“It would have real-world consequences for some pretty powerless people,” Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) said Tuesday. “People would literally freeze.”
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) warned the cuts could force low-income families to cut back on cooking meals to stay warm.
“They’ll buy a space heater and put their lives in danger,” DeLauro told reporters.
Senate Democrats have also slammed the energy cuts. “Talk about misplaced, off-track priorities,” said Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). “I won’t support a budget that dumps billions of dollars into high-speed rail while cutting something as basic as heat for family homes across Montana and America.”
Mr. President….looks like you’ve been given the cold shoulder.
Doesn’t look like Americans are buying into the “improved” economy either.
Poll: Most Americans Uneasy About the U.S. Economy
Southern Comfort (B.P.O.I.B.W.)
February 16th, 2011
11:34 am
jm
Legislation can limit what and where the money can be used. That, in essence, would create a “lockbox”. Legislation can also create an exemption for the US to invest SS funds in the US. As I said, quit electing jackasses, and put people who are serious about doing for the common good in office.
You keep saying it’s impossible. It was impossible for Columbus to sail to the US. It was also impossible for the African Negro to learn to read and speak English. It was impossible to put a man in space. And, yes, it’s impossible to create a lockbox for SS so that the funds collected are used solely for that purpose.
Nice Guy
February 16th, 2011
11:35 am
“Why are Republicans so quick to volunteer others to write checks to pay down the debt”
Oh, Taxpayer. Please read the post again. You’ll see Mick voluteered himself, but then backed out when I provided the site to make a payment.
“I think Republicans just like to whine.”
And I think some Left-nuts don’t like to read.
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:35 am
MPercy: I’d be ok with all the taxes resetting to Clinton levels EXCEPT for the part where the lowest income bracket gets to pay 5% more of their income, and the top bracket only has to pay about 3.5% more. So, I would say all but that bottom bracket should get reset. Why? two reasons:
1) The bottom bracket is now full of people who are making LESS than they did when the minimum wage was still less than 7.25, due to hours cuts and other things, so they are less able to take a tax hit than they were in 2000.
2) An increase of 5% on the lowest bracket, and lower percentages of increase on the other brackets, is just not fair.
Doggone/GA
February 16th, 2011
11:36 am
“But you must be right it is those aweful rich business owners fault, none of the blame falls to the american worker”
I never said anything like that
carlosgvv
February 16th, 2011
11:36 am
Jay, you say congress has to lower health-care delivery costs, cut defense spending and raise taxes. This will take a great deal of political courage. Since this kind of courage is rare or non-existent in Washington, I would say the odds of this happening anytime soon are about zero.
TaxPayer
February 16th, 2011
11:37 am
Mick is not the one sounding delirious, “nice guy”. Neither do you though. Delirium would be a copout in your case.
Jay
February 16th, 2011
11:37 am
MPercy, that would be everybody.
Adam
February 16th, 2011
11:38 am
carlosgv: You are correct. It is much more likely there will be a continual kicking of the can across the aisle, or passing of the hot potato, or whatever metaphor you want to use.