Obama: Why, we can’t cut spending by 2.3 percent!
Today, the Congressional Budget Office projected this year’s deficit to be $845 billion. It would be the first time during Barack Obama’s presidency that the deficit could be measured with only a 12-digit number. Hooray?
CBO expects higher tax revenues, including the tax increases included in the Jan. 1 deal to avert the so-called fiscal cliff, to contribute $259 billion toward deficit reduction. (Here, I repeat my standard disclaimer that CBO almost always over-estimates the increase in revenues that comes with higher tax rates because it does not even attempt to consider how people will change their behavior to avoid paying higher taxes.)
Yet, also today, Obama said he does not want to see spending cuts of just $85 billion due to the sequester take effect.
For those keeping score at home, the cuts he opposes equal (take your pick):
- just 2.3 percent of all federal spending this year;
- just 10.1 percent of even this year’s deficit;
- a mere $1 for every $3 in deficit reduction due to higher revenues (the bulk of which, according to the CBO report, are related to the fiscal cliff deal) — that is, the reverse of the standard ratio discussed for taxes vs. spending in a deficit deal.
Instead of such paltry cuts, Obama wants smaller cuts, even more tax increases, and yet another punt of the larger deficit issue.
Oh, and he missed yesterday’s deadline for submitting a budget to Congress — the third straight year he’s done so.
And some people wonder why conservatives accuse Obama of not being serious about our deficits and debt.
– By Kyle Wingfield
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
179 comments Add your comment
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
2:35 pm
It isn’t really about what obozo wants, it’s about whether the Republicans in Congress have the courage and conviction to do what they were elected to do. But, with me being a realist and all, I see another total cave in coming our way.
Third party, anyone?
Ben
February 5th, 2013
2:49 pm
Let’s hear some more specific cuts there Kyle – it gets much harder to explain what’s getting cut when you’re not speaking in the abstract…
Biff
February 5th, 2013
2:54 pm
The problem seems to be-with tens of billions of dollars flowing out of the economy, (and into the hands of the uberwealthy, where it is not invested-but accumulated), the 2.3 % reduction in actual money, and the attendant velocity it provides, is a real blow. The problem, when you have a family of 5 controlling the equivalent wealth of the lower 100,000,000 Americans, is that those 5 are not content-they will continue “investing” in politicians that will continue to tilt things their way; aided and abetted by those such as this author, who prefer to sweep dirt specks off the track, while ignoring the oncoming train.
Wilton Businessman
February 5th, 2013
2:57 pm
Here’s a 2.3% cut for Ben: No more $42,000 toilet seats.
NeldaDee
February 5th, 2013
2:58 pm
What a load of baloney. 2004 – Republicans: “Woo hoo! We’re in office! SPEND!!!” Democrats: “um, okay but wars cost money……” then 2009 – Republicans: “STOP the spending!” Democrats: *heads spinning*
JDW
February 5th, 2013
2:58 pm
@Kyle…”Obama said he does not want to see spending cuts of just $85 billion due to the sequester take effect.”
Of course neither do Republicans…question is does it come from peoples income and health care or the military?
As for the deadline…
I am sure he is the first…o wait nope
indigo
February 5th, 2013
3:00 pm
“does not want to see spending cuts”
Maybe that’s because the Republicans are dead set on cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicade and won’t go near any cuts to The Military Industrial Complex.
Spending cuts affecting those who can least afford it and ignoring any cuts to their wealthy corporate sponsors is the Republican way.
BW
February 5th, 2013
3:00 pm
Yep all Obama’s fault…let’s see what the Republican House produces
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
3:01 pm
Immediately return all spending back to the 2008 level.
Next question?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
3:02 pm
Pardon me, 2006, I forgot about nasty pelosi’s gang.
Whatever
February 5th, 2013
3:02 pm
We will have to pay the piper one day. I love how nobody wants their income, health care, or military cut today but are more than happy to see their kids and grandkids have to suffer for them.
Don’t push this off on your kids and grandkids. Pay up now and show what real leadership is.
Cherokee
February 5th, 2013
3:03 pm
The CBO report is also pretty clear that the debt hysteria – and reductions already in place – are a primary contributor to our economic problems.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/02/deficit-obsession-has-hurt-the-recovery-cbo.php
I would second the request – which specific cuts would you back that would 1) be supported by the American people, and 2) significantly cut the deficit?
Brad
February 5th, 2013
3:04 pm
If he managed the Budget like Bush and the Republicans who took a 100 Billion dollar increase in the National debt from Fiscal Year 2001 and turned it into a 1.5 Trillion dollar annual deficit the deficit would be 22.5 Trillion in 4 years.
Obama came in, passed the stimulus plan which increased that first year deficit to 1.9 Trillion and added additional spending to the next two years. He stopped the Enron style accounting Bush was doing and stopped using supplemental spending to hide the true size of the deficit. Supplemental spending was around 350 Billion in Fiscal Year 2008 where Bush claimed to have a 450 Billion dollar deficit. (if you add the supplemental spending it was 800 Billion)
Even without hiding the war spending the federal budget has increased only 10% in four years under Obama and now we see 4 years after taking office he’s cut the Federal Deficit by 50% just like he promised.
Federal Spending during the Bush years went from 1.9 Trillion to 3.5 Trillion. It’s only 3.8 Trillion four years later.
I’ll tell you who’s not serious and that’s every damn lying conservative in the country.
barking frog
February 5th, 2013
3:04 pm
Republicans need only stand pat and the cuts will happen.
Cherokee
February 5th, 2013
3:05 pm
And as to submitting a budget, I would recommend that you read your own paper. jamie has a pretty good blog post on that topic….
Thomas Heyward Jr
February 5th, 2013
3:09 pm
Well…………..as per Wingfeild……….no matter what these Washington maniacs spend……..don’t EVEN think of seceding.
.
Don’t even sign a petition wishing to do so.
.
Our great great grand children will just have to buckle up and work harder.
.
lol……………..not.
Jefferson
February 5th, 2013
3:10 pm
Sounds like the GOP could easy defeat him in an election, so what so wrong with the GOP ?
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
3:13 pm
Ben @ 2:49: The White House has already outlined how the $85B in cuts would be made. I’m not the one advocating against them.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 5th, 2013
3:19 pm
Kyle, have you checked lately to see how that austerity is working out in Europe?
It appears to be an utter failure.
CC
February 5th, 2013
3:19 pm
One more time . . .
Neither and individual nor a nation can either borrow itself way out of debt or spend itself wealthy.
To continue to borrow and spend only prolongs the inevitable and make the inevitable worse in its coming. Liberals apparently are not intelligent enough to realize these obvious basic truths.
Hussein is on track and ahead of schedule to accomplish his purpose thanks to the unintelligent, uninformed and terminally liberal.
Jefferson
February 5th, 2013
3:20 pm
We didn’t have a spending problem, until we started cutting revenue…
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
3:21 pm
Wow. Hard to tell whether Biff @ 2:54 or Brad @ 3:04 has the lesser grasp of the facts today.
Biff: Which “family of 5,” exactly, has as much wealth as 100M Americans?
Brad: The $450B figure for FY08 is not a budgeting gimmick Bush made up to cover for a lot of other spending. It represents the deficit between all money actually collected by the federal government and all money actually spent — regardless of whether it was in the budget, a supplemental or anything else. See here. And the talk about “hiding” the war spending outside the budget before, but not now, is all the more rich given that the Senate has not passed a budget at all in almost four years now. By your standard, all the spending is hidden now!
CC
February 5th, 2013
3:22 pm
“Neither and individual” should read “Neither an individual”.
Sorry for the typo . . .
matt
February 5th, 2013
3:23 pm
Why can’t all of you see that politicians are not out to help the American people. They are agenda pushing, “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours”, power hungry, dishonest people. It does not matter who is in the House who is in the Senate, who is in the White House. They are all liars. When you vote, you are not voting for the best candidate, you are voting for the guy who is going to screw you the least.
CNN is biased, Fox is biased, there are two sides to every story and depending on which of those you watch will depend on which side of the story you get. Face it, politcians, no matter which party will ruin this country. If not in your lifetime, then in mine, and if not in mine then in my kids. It’s just a matter of time.
Save your “the guy I voted for is awesome” argument. You won’t find a more scandalous bunch of liars anywhere than in politics.
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
3:24 pm
Finn @ 3:19: As I’ve explained before, the vast majority of the “austerity” in Europe is tax increases. And you’re right, those have been an utter failure.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to my Left and Jokers to my Right here I am....
February 5th, 2013
3:27 pm
KYLE
I have been pressing this question on Jay’s blog time and time again with zero credible reactions…Politics of following the money if guess. The fact that BO has exhibited poor, if non-existent leadership skills it the root. Why would we expect him to make any decisions that didn’t represent small ball(s) politics?
He cares not about borrowing, spending etectera as long as the DEMs don’t upset any aspect of cash sources. They see the medicine the GOP is getting and are a couple of courageous decisions away from being in same state…
At this rate, BO will definitely go down as worst fiscal Potus in history. He will just go down possibly as better that Bush…what a great legacy that will wrought eh?
Del
February 5th, 2013
3:30 pm
The campaigner-n-chief became the propagandist-n-chief this afternoon. Sadly at least for now we have about 53% of the electorate who either believe this snake oil peddler or are so ideologically brainwashed they don’t care if he’s a liar.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to my Left and Jokers to my Right here I am....
February 5th, 2013
3:30 pm
KYLE
The expected 2013 deficit reduction estimate rests on perilously thin ground. CBO has been anything but accurate in terms of growth estimates. Second, this assumes that congress spending will not exceed (rule v norm)the allocated funds..
At least BO is setting a fine precedent for future presidents..no budget submission, no worries..
mbtc
February 5th, 2013
3:30 pm
Obama’s trying not to starve the recovery, as well he should. Let those who have benefited the most from this economy sacrifice. End lopholes and deductions on the wealthiest.
MANGLER
February 5th, 2013
3:31 pm
OK, let’s reduce 2.3% of all Federal Spending this year. ALL Federal spending, not just the things the GOP wants to gut, er cut.
Fewer planes and bombs while continuing to bring troops home. If they’re not getting blown up over seas, they’re not requiring medical attention, which you also want to pay less for. Win Win.
Next, eliminate farm subsidies. If a farmer can’t support a lifestyle by farming, then he moves on – free market and all that.
Moving on to energy subsidies. All of them, not just the “green” ones. Companies that record record profits don’t need help to get firm footings in the world of business. If start-ups are valid, private capital will roll in. More of that free market stuff.
Lay off 2.3% (more) of the Federal work force. They’ll make less with unemployment than they would have at salary anyway – and that spells $avings
Just ignore the slowing of the GDP and rising of the unemployment rosters by doing that.
Jefferson
February 5th, 2013
3:31 pm
Again, what is SO wrong with the GOP ? Or great if you must…
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 5th, 2013
3:33 pm
Third party, anyone?
Here, here. I usually like a menage e trois.
mbtc
February 5th, 2013
3:37 pm
“Neither and individual nor a nation can either borrow itself way out of debt or spend itself wealthy.”
Wish the republicans from Reagan to Bush II had known that. A lot of their base got extremely wealthy.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to my Left and Jokers to my Right here I am....
February 5th, 2013
3:37 pm
KYLE
Several good pieces lately about the difficulty economists are having with any real consensus on the near future. Here’s one you probabaly already seen but I rather liked.
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-13/face-it-2013-is-gonna-be-a-bummer
Also, there have been no shortage of writings about Japan’s current narcotic of choice..stimulus programs that bear little if any long term fruit…
Jefferson
February 5th, 2013
3:39 pm
You will never think strait, if you are angry all the time.
CC
February 5th, 2013
3:41 pm
Indigo:
“Maybe that’s because the Republicans are dead set on cutting Social Security, Medicare and Medicade and won’t go near any cuts to The Military Industrial Complex.”
You still reading from the dimocrat playbook of yesterday?
Stevie Ray...Clowns to my Left and Jokers to my Right here I am....
February 5th, 2013
3:43 pm
mbtc
February 5th, 2013
3:30 pm
Great there oh economic genius…so we get the “rich” (whatever that means anymore) to now pay 90% or total collections…how much of the problem will that address? Don’t forget the fact that with accepted growth in entitlements and other new spends..Pelosi-Care for example, most if not all of any new revenues are already spoken for…
At some point, all taxpayers are gonna have to pony up something. No country in the world has ever gotten out of this type situation without everyone paying a “fairshare” including the alledged “victims” the middle class.
Centrist
February 5th, 2013
3:43 pm
Dead on about CBO and Democrats purposeful static tax analysis which is ALWAYS very wrong.
Obama’s tax and spending proposal to avoid sequestration is dead on arrival in Congress – like the few past budget proposals he bothered to make. Just like his annual calls to repeal the Bush tax cuts and for taxes to rise on those making more than $250K – his latest proposals will be ignored (except by the liberal media).
Stevie Ray...Clowns to my Left and Jokers to my Right here I am....
February 5th, 2013
3:45 pm
indigo
February 5th, 2013
3:00 pm
None of the cuts to entitlements proposed will have the devastating impact dramatized by the left. I completely agree. Why we can’t simply cut 10-15% out of DoD is mind-boggling. What do we need with all that crap? Maybe if we didn’t have so much killing power, we wouldn’t feel the need to put it to use at the drop of a hat.
Stevie Ray...Clowns to my Left and Jokers to my Right here I am....
February 5th, 2013
3:50 pm
Jefferson
February 5th, 2013
3:31 pm
They like the DEMS are corrupted with campaign and lobbyist cash…unlike the DEMS at this time, the big money is coming from angry and warring factions due to void of leadership..that being said and given the void of leadership in the WH, it’s a wonder the DEMs are not trending toward the same mutiny.
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
3:53 pm
From a guy who refused to use his own deficit commission’s very sane straightforward approach to a debt reduction plan did we really expect anything different than a refusal to cut spending Kyle ?
From – Tax Policy Center
The Bowles-Simpson “Chairmen’s Mark” Deficit Reduction Plan
Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, co-chairs of President Obama’s Deficit Commission, have released a “Chairmen’s Mark,” a broad plan to reduce the federal deficit by cutting spending and raising taxes. The plan includes various options that would impose different changes on the tax side of the fiscal equation. The first option, “The Zero Plan,” would, among other things, pare away most tax expenditures, devote $80 billion annually to reduce the deficit, and use remaining revenue gains to cut tax rates.
The Tax Policy center has analyzed the distributional effects of three variants of the Zero Plan:
1.Eliminate all tax expenditures—for both income and payroll taxes—except the EITC, the child credit, foreign tax credits, and a few less common preferences.
2.Eliminate tax expenditures only for income taxes, not for payroll taxes.
3.Eliminate tax expenditures only for income taxes—not for payroll taxes—but cap and restructure the tax benefits for mortgage interest, employer-sponsored health insurance, and retirement saving instead of eliminating them.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/Bowles_Simpson_Brief.cfm
Georgia, The " New Mississippi "
February 5th, 2013
3:57 pm
Kyle , the only thing Americans want from the House GOP is for them to do their jobs. Their job is to propose , write , introduce , debate and vote on legislation. Once they figure out that someone other than Grover Norquist and Fox News will need to support the Bills created , they may be able to do something besides cause problems for working people.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
4:01 pm
The cuts will cause unemployment to rise.
You still don’t get it Kyle.
Did they fix your party yet?
Centrist
February 5th, 2013
4:02 pm
Following posturing proposals to avoid sequestration for the next 3 weeks is a waste of time.
Only proposals made in 3 weeks or after sequestration begins March 1st will have merit under government last minute crisis management policy. The House of Representatives (Speaker Boehner’s) proposals will either be accepted by the President and the Senate, or we will have sequestration. Either way, the media will declare Obama to have “won”.
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
4:02 pm
And once the democrats figure out that the House GOP will never support spending and tax bills written by the likes of Van Jones and MSNBC then they may be able do something besides cause problems for the good of the country and all concerned.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
4:06 pm
The gop establishment is winning cons.
You have to fight back.
The libs did.
No more dlc.
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
4:07 pm
Spending as a percentage of GDP is at the highest sustained level in 70 years. Unemployment is at the highest sustained level in 70 years.
You still don’t get it getalife.
Tealiban Party
February 5th, 2013
4:08 pm
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
3:24 pm
Finn @ 3:19: As I’ve explained before, the vast majority of the “austerity” in Europe is tax increases. And you’re right, those have been an utter failure.
In the UK, for their 2012 budget, the top tax rate was cut 5% and they let the threshold for the personal income tax allowance rise. Of course this is in addition to the largest cuts since WWII. Why is their economy sputtering Kyle? Tax cuts cure all I thought….
getalife
February 5th, 2013
4:10 pm
Spending has dropped and unemployment is dropping .
Get out of the way of free commerce Kyle.
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
4:12 pm
Yeah “never let a crisis go to waste” said Rahm Emanuel.
The media declaring dear leader Obama the winner is about credible as asking Michelle Obama who lost!
Politico
February 5th, 2013
4:15 pm
“The media declaring dear leader Obama the winner is about credible as asking Michelle Obama who lost!”
Romney lost. No need to ask Michelle. Heck, even you should have heard by now.
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
4:15 pm
Oh and didn’t the economy actually contract last quarter Kyle?
Cutty
February 5th, 2013
4:17 pm
Kyle voted for Newt. Nuff said.
joe
February 5th, 2013
4:18 pm
Brad=loony liberal left bafoon
getalife
February 5th, 2013
4:18 pm
These gop self inflicted wounds are getting old.
We want unemployment down not up cons.
Talk about needless regulation.
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
4:21 pm
Romney lost. No need to ask Michelle. Heck, even you should have heard by now.
And you should know, before trying that lame retort, that a wife cannot testify against her husband was being compared to the media’s relationship with your dear leader as both share a bed with him !
Georgia, The " New Mississippi "
February 5th, 2013
4:23 pm
Republican = A person ( usually a white guy ) that thinks his opinion is the only one that matters and is willing commit suicide to prove it.
Politico
February 5th, 2013
4:24 pm
Whose testifying? No wonder you seem lost so often
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
4:25 pm
Libs want unemployment down not up?
Y’all have a very strange $5 trillion ineffectual way of achieving that goal!
Decatur Guy
February 5th, 2013
4:25 pm
“You still don’t get it getalife.”
Understatement of the year.
Scooter
February 5th, 2013
4:27 pm
Obama’s deficit commission recommended the sequestration deal so let it happen. That will show if creating the commission was simply The Obama’s way of voting present on deficit reduction.
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
4:28 pm
Whose testifying?
Your reading comprehension is lousy, though not as bad as your boring failed attempts at humor.
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
4:40 pm
Tealiban @ 4:08: Spending in the U.K. is down 1.7% this year. If that’s crippling austerity, the entire West is doomed.
Pizzaman
February 5th, 2013
4:48 pm
All talk and no action from either side. Both responsible. Both guilty. Why even care till someone does something?
md
February 5th, 2013
4:52 pm
“The problem seems to be-with tens of billions of dollars flowing out of the economy, (and into the hands of the uberwealthy, where it is not invested-but accumulated)”
And you really can’t see where it goes? The rich bogeyman really gets it all?
Ask yourself a few questions…..all those products you and your neighbors are buying that are made in another country, does any of that go back to the other country?
After our car czar sold Chrysler and Jeep to the Italians, does all the profit stay in the US?
Put your thinking cap on and follow the money……..
MarkV
February 5th, 2013
4:52 pm
As usual Kyle’s article avoids any specifics of his viewpoints. He criticizes the President for “paltry cuts.” So why don’t we hear from Kyle, which cuts he wants the President to make. Does he want to cut military spending, subsidies for oil companies, or research, education, healthcare for low income people?
md
February 5th, 2013
4:53 pm
“Spending has dropped and unemployment is dropping .”
Who you trying to fool get? The unemployment number just went UP…..
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:09 pm
Kyle wants him some of that triple dip recession like England with their high unemployment rate.
Not on my watch Kyle.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:11 pm
Our President’s 4 trillion cut is still on the table.
Why won’t the gop accept it?
That is the question.
You cons need to fight back to rove.
He represents the gop establishment.
Get him.
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
5:11 pm
The Guardian, Jan. 23: “U.K. unemployment rate falls to 7.7%”
The Guardian, Feb. 1: “U.S. unemployment rate climbs to 7.9%”
Your watch ain’t going so well, getalife.
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
5:12 pm
getalife @ 5:11: Obama’s $4 trillion proposal counts as new the military spending he’s already planned by pulling out of Afghanistan. Among other gimmicks.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:13 pm
Kyle,
Now do England’s unemployment rate.
That is what you want. .
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:14 pm
“he’s already planned by pulling out of Afghanistan. Among other gimmicks”
Ending occupations is a gimmick?.
Reaching.
CC
February 5th, 2013
5:14 pm
md:
“Ask yourself a few questions…..all those products you and your neighbors are buying that are made in another country, does any of that go back to the other country?”
The term “favorable balance of trade” is foreign to most libs . . .
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
5:19 pm
I’m just hoping the “sequester” cuts are even real and not just another obozo spending increase, like all the other “cuts” we’ve made in the last four years..
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:19 pm
Just pretend rove is President Obama and attack the same.
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
5:20 pm
Counting it as new is the gimmick, getalife. As for England: Why would I compare the whole U.S. to one part of the U.K.?
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:24 pm
Because you look silly crying about unemployment when you want to cut to make it higher.
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
5:26 pm
Nice non-answer.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:26 pm
Kyle,
What is the unemployment estimate for your cuts?
How many American jobs will be lost?
Stephenson Billings
February 5th, 2013
5:31 pm
So much for Obama’s statement that if you like your insurance, you can keep it (of course those of us paying attention knew this would happen all along):
Seven million will lose insurance under Obama health law
“President Obama’s health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.
CBO said that this year’s tax cuts have changed the incentives for businesses and made it less attractive to pay for insurance, meaning fewer will decide to do so. Instead, they’ll choose to pay a penalty to the government, totaling $13 billion in higher fees over the next decade.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/feb/5/obama-health-law-will-cost-7-million/
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:32 pm
We are definitely on the right track but need the gop to get out of the way.
The idea is to lower unemployment not raise it.
Perhaps switch your focus from getting our President to fixing your party.
Tealiban Party
February 5th, 2013
5:39 pm
Kyle Wingfield
February 5th, 2013
4:40 pm
You only need to go back to 2010 Kyle when the UK Austerity measures kicked in. Here are the highights Kyle.
About 490,000 public sector jobs likely to be lost
Average 19% four-year cut in departmental budgets
Structural deficit to be eliminated by 2015
£7bn in additional welfare budget cuts
Police funding cut by 4% a year
Retirement age to rise from 65 to 66 by 2020
English schools budget protected; £2bn extra for social care
NHS budget in England to rise every year until 2015
Regulated rail fares to rise 3% above inflation
Bank levy to be made permanent
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11569160
That sounds a little more draconian than your end of western-civilization as we know it 1.7% cut. Or perhaps the English quickly realized they “can’t cut their way to prosperity.”
CC
February 5th, 2013
5:40 pm
getalife doesn’t ‘get it’. getalife personified Peter’s Principle by merely being born . . .
Stephenson Billings
February 5th, 2013
5:41 pm
If cutting spending just a little bit causes a big jump in unemployment, then I’d say we have too many gov’t workers.
indigo
February 5th, 2013
5:42 pm
Stephenson Billings
Business has been trying, for some time now, to weasel out of sharing healthcare costs with their employees.
Obamacare has given them the perfect excuse to increase their profits at the expense of their employees all the while crying “poor”.
Predatory American Capitalism at its very best.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:43 pm
“About 490,000 public sector jobs likely to be lost”
Stephenson Billings
February 5th, 2013
5:46 pm
certainly didn’t take long for someone to blame the businesses, not the new regulations….. not surprised though.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:47 pm
cc,
What are you mumbling about?
getalife
February 5th, 2013
5:49 pm
“Or perhaps the English quickly realized they “can’t cut their way to prosperity.”
Yeah, their numbers look awful.
So bad they will vote to leave the EU.
MarkV
February 5th, 2013
5:49 pm
“CBO said that this year’s tax cuts have changed the incentives for businesses and made it less attractive to pay for insurance, meaning fewer will decide to do so. Instead, they’ll choose to pay a penalty to the government, totaling $13 billion in higher fees over the next decade.”
Higher fees – the government will be able to subsidize those who lose insurance.
“Instead, they’ll choose to pay a penalty to the government;” The solution is obvious – increase the penalty.
Stephenson Billings
February 5th, 2013
5:51 pm
And, IMO, employer provided health insurance is an outdated WWII era relic that employees regarded as something expected and not a benefit as part of their compensation.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 5th, 2013
5:55 pm
Obama is never going to get serious about spending cuts, he wants larger government that does more things for more people. You can’t get there with spending cuts.
The GOP has little power at this point, but Obama boxed himself in a corner, when he suggested the sequester. Now he thinks this was a bad idea. The GOP should answer that you made your bed, now sleep in it.
As far as austerity. Much of it in Europe is imposed by circumstances/creditors. They have the same spendthrift politicians they have always had, except for Merkel. Our coming austerity will be forced as well by creditors as we don’t have the cajones to proactively bring our budget under control.
indigo
February 5th, 2013
5:56 pm
CC – 3:41
You still hiding from reality?
Lee
February 5th, 2013
6:01 pm
The fact remains our federal government is going to have to make spending cuts – TRUE spending cuts, not cutting the increase – in order for this country to right itself fiscally.
The second thing is that our politicians do not have the discipline to cut – anything. As long as they can attach a spending bill as a rider to any peice of legislation, they will continue to do so and thereby continue to spend us into oblivian.
Some hard questions must be answered:
- Why are we still in Iraq / Afghanistan?
- Why is our military still in S. Korea, Germany, Japan, and a hundred other points across the globe?
- Why are we giving money away to countless countries that hate our guts and work to destroy us?
- You think 20-30 ILLEGAL ALIENS in this country taking advantage of our healthcare, education, and public assistance systems have any effect?
But our politicians cannot cut 2-3 percent? Our country is in for some very hard times ahead. At some point, the choice to cut spending will be made for us – and it ain’t gonna be pretty.
Politico
February 5th, 2013
6:10 pm
MHS
Don’t let that ODS get out of hand
getalife
February 5th, 2013
6:13 pm
This 85 billion cut loses how many jobs?
Then you will cry about high unemployment.
You can’t have it both ways.
I doubt congress will come up with a plan so you might win this one but don’t cry when unemployment goes up.
md
February 5th, 2013
6:15 pm
“So bad they will vote to leave the EU.”
It’s not all about their economy, it’s about their sovereignty….seems it’s a bit hard handing over the reins to that new one world gov’t. Once they push all in, it’s a whole lot harder getting out and I think the Brits are now seeing that.
A bit like the States when they created that monster that now controls them……
getalife
February 5th, 2013
6:18 pm
md,
They listened to Germany, a country that bombed the crap out them.
Pretty bizarre but it is what it is.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
6:24 pm
In November 2011, President Obama lamented that “some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts” that were part of that August’s deal to raise the debt limit. “My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one.”
Heh, for once obozo said something that is true.
md
February 5th, 2013
6:28 pm
“Pretty bizarre but it is what it is.”
Or is it?
The polls over there indicate the Brits want out……
http://www.democracymovementsurrey.co.uk/dyk_pollwatch.html
If it were me and knowing how mighty our fed has become, I’d vote to get out too…….
getalife
February 5th, 2013
6:29 pm
” I’ve also said that we need more revenue, through tax reform, by closing loopholes in our tax code for the wealthiest Americans. If we combine a balanced package of savings from spending on health care and revenues from closing loopholes, we can solve the deficit issue without sacrificing our investments in things like education that are going to help us grow.
Turns out the American people agree with me. They listened to an entire year’s debate over this issue, and they made a clear decision about the approach they prefer.” President Obama.
Deficit reduction is part of his agenda.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
6:33 pm
Listen to the loons over at cnbc -
Germany is in a much better fiscal position to rev up its recessionary economy. With stable prices, balanced budget and a whopping 6 percent of GDP trade surplus, Germany could cut taxes and step up government spending to stimulate domestic demand. That would spur Germany’s buying of foreign goods and services and help its struggling euro zone partners. But Germany does not want to do that. It is killing its domestic demand by fiscal austerity, counting on exports to ride out the cyclical downturn.
How do you think they got the stability, balanced budget and surpluses in the first place? The austerity the libs want them to abandon? Do these kooks even know what they’re talking about?
md
February 5th, 2013
6:34 pm
Well, if we have another negative quarter, ie recession, and the folks get clobbered with Obamacare, it will get interesting as to how the fickle masses react…….it’s a no brainer when voting for someone else to pay more, but when it starts hitting their wallets they get all in a tizzy…..
md
February 5th, 2013
6:37 pm
They want Germany to buy lots and lots of lottery tickets and screw up their balanced budget in the HOPES of bigger growth……
Now, if some guy came into your living room and told you you can possibly win a couple million if you just borrowed 10k to buy some lottery tickets, what would you tell the guy?
getalife
February 5th, 2013
6:39 pm
md,
I think of it as who will pay for the collapse?
There will be pain and they chose to take it too early so their economy is in recession.
Short term pain gor long term gain.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
6:40 pm
dummycrats have been “investing in education” ever since, oh, when was it, yeah, when the United States was ranked #1 in education.
And now what are we? 28th?
Hey but at least we’ve got a giant teacher’s union.
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
6:41 pm
kyle
This whole debt fixation is a red herring in our current economics. When the economy is running at full throttle and employment is at 6%, that will be the time to start cutting and bring our fiscal house in order, but not until then. Employment is the hidden statistic for more revenue without raising taxes.
Republicans on the other hand have been in temporal lobe fits ever since obama walked through the door about the deficit. OK, we all agree its too high but there is a proper timing to attack it aggressively. I totally agree with obama’s approach which is both pragmatic and logical. Stop hyperventilating about it and take deep breaths, we can get there.
By the way, very curious to see what “your guy” paul ryan comes up with. He and romney were quite deficient on the specifics of their economic policy. Now, he has to name his cuts. I will be open minded and see if he can really rise to the occasion instead typical hard right ideology – mainly tax cuts, we spent a decade digging that hole…
getalife
February 5th, 2013
6:44 pm
gor is for.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
6:44 pm
When our little two bit tin pot socialist says he wants to “invest in education,” just remember the marxist translation of that is “I want to give the teacher’s union tons of your children’s future so they can kick it back to the dnc.”
getalife
February 5th, 2013
6:47 pm
Deficit reduction not balance the budget until there is a law to stop the gop or dems from blowing it out again.
CC
February 5th, 2013
7:02 pm
“Turns out the American people agree with me. They listened to an entire year’s debate over this issue, and they made a clear decision about the approach they prefer.” President Obama.
Yeah . . . gimme mo’ o’ the free sh#t!
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
February 5th, 2013
7:07 pm
Yeah . . . gimme mo’ o’ the free sh#t!
Haliburton says, “What?”
md
February 5th, 2013
7:12 pm
” When the economy is running at full throttle and employment is at 6%, that will be the time to start cutting and bring our fiscal house in order, but not until then.”
You mean “if”, and there in lies the problem. The only guarantee in that scenario is the debt continues to climb…….then what?
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
7:15 pm
Politico
Don’t let that ODS get out of hand
Mine isn’t, take care of your pathetic own.
Tap Out
February 5th, 2013
7:18 pm
Austerity during a recession or high unemployment has been shown to be wrong. Republicans know this, but then they only talk cuts when they’re not in the White House.
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
7:18 pm
“You mean “if”, and there in lies the problem. The only guarantee in that scenario is the debt continues to climb…….then what?
There is an old saying about hypotheticals, I’ll cross that bridge when I get there. The real key to recovery is the ending of the housing crisis. Inventory is starting to move, construction has to rebound for any type of recovery, those are good middle class jobs.
I suspect you’ve been around for awhile, the recession in 1974 was particularly devastating to my family.
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
7:20 pm
Deficit reduction not balance the budget until there is a law to stop the gop or dems from blowing it out again.
Constitutional balanced budget amendment not a law would is the answer.
indigo
February 5th, 2013
7:26 pm
Aesop – 6:44
In no way is Obama a Socialist. If he were it would be readly apparent and he would have never been re-elected.
You seem to think that repeating a lie often enough here will actually convence some to believe you.
I can post the definition as often as you can lie.
http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+socialism&qpvt=socialism&FORM=DTPDIA
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
7:28 pm
The real key to recovery is the ending of the housing crisis. Inventory is starting to move, construction has to rebound for any type of recovery, those are good middle class jobs.
Therein is a conundrum. I feel your pain but a house building recovering is a long way from happening nationally and we don’t want a repeat of the last housing bubble just to clear a glut. Other problems co-exist with construction dependent jobs, though, this isn’t the time to open up that can of worms.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 5th, 2013
7:31 pm
When the economy is running at full throttle and employment is at 6%,
We will never get there with Obama running the economy. This is like saying our track team will be entering some international competition, as soon as our star miler, Rosanne Barr breaks 4 minutes in the mile.
I totally agree with obama’s approach which is both pragmatic and logical.
I have never heard any Obama approach to the deficit, it is just “now is not the time”. You have faith that he would someday deal with it, if the time was right. I don’t think the time will ever be right, as he only has four more years, and if previous experience is your best indicator of future performance, it just ain’t gonna happen. I don’t think he cares about the debt or deficit. When he was surprised during the 2008 campaign to find out how bad fiscal shape we were in, the media asked about all the aggressive spending he had previously proposed. They wanted to know what he was going to cut from his wish list. They said, surely he can’t do all this spending, now that we are on the brink of collapse. He procrastinated for a week or so indicating he was thinking about maybe scaling back some, but then he said he was not going to cut anything. I think he is just going to worry about his legacy, which he thinks consists of how many new programs he can get started, and let the next guy worry about the aftermath. He is after all narcissistic and self absorbed, and is not going to let anything stop him from doing what he wants to do, good time or bad.
md
February 5th, 2013
7:33 pm
“There is an old saying about hypotheticals, I’ll cross that bridge when I get there.”
There are a few other countries that have tried that method as well…..the largest was probably the USSR. Greece was the most recent…….Japan sits at 200% debt to gdp….Zimbabwe is printing gazillion dollar bills…….
Personally, I’d prefer to work with in our budget, but I don’t see it happening. And Obamacare is not going to be the panacea most seem to be expecting, it’s going to open some eyes to dollar signs coming from their pockets……
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
February 5th, 2013
7:34 pm
Did someone say deficit?
Which brings us to the economic level. The deficits that Bush ran up in the years in which the country was teetering on the verge of a serious recession had the beneficial effect of righting the economy. In that sense, deficits not only didn’t matter, but were a force for economic good.
Translation: IOKIYAR
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 5th, 2013
7:35 pm
getalife
You must differ from your man Obama, he doesn’t support a balanced budget amendment, he thinks it would be too restrictive. Hey, big spender, spend a little more on me!
md
February 5th, 2013
7:36 pm
“I totally agree with obama’s approach which is both pragmatic and logical.”
And it just produced a negative quarter of gdp growth….and it was the Christmas buying season….that doesn’t bode well for the next quarter which is historically the worst…..
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
7:38 pm
Your bling definition fits the obama redistribution dogma:
a political theory or system in which the means of production and distribution are controlled by the people[government] and operated according to equity and fairness rather than market principles
equity and fairness rather than market principles
parallels the matra of Karl Marx, “from each according to their ability to each according to their need.”
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
7:40 pm
rafe
I’ve been around awhile and seen many cycles of boom and bust. Obama is nowhere as bad as you scream nor is he as good as you think I think he is. The circumstances that we are in are unique to this time. Everyone knew the housing bubble would pop but the scars are deep because people can no longer use it as a credit card. Once this viscious cycle abates, building will come back and we all know there is plenty to fix.
All the money gov’t spends for disasters is a mini stimulus. I agree with the idea that the only solution is to grow our way out but the pump must be primed.
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
7:43 pm
md
Selective about your quarters? Don’t forget, the populous northeast was affected by the storm right before xmas. You have a negative take on things, lighten up.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 5th, 2013
7:45 pm
equity and fairness rather than market principles= it is only fair that those who have benefited the most can pay a little more. Who said that, wasn’t GWB or Reagan, it was ….let me think, the guy who also said “a little redistribution is not a bad thing”, wasn’t Chavez, or Castro, or Putin, I’ll get it in a minute, maybe it was Forest Gump, you think?
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
7:49 pm
This vicious cycle cannot abate until the fraud that started it is eliminated. Part of the housing problem is government involvement that grew out of hand beginning from FDR’s action which had good intentions but lacked limits to prevent further intrusion into the housing market and then into home mortgages.
The pump needs priming from honest valuation met with real money and credit worthiness requirements restored to the market.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
7:50 pm
indigo – If obozo isn’t a socialist, it’s because he was too dumb to fill out the application.
md
February 5th, 2013
7:52 pm
“Selective about your quarters?”
Umm….no. Merely pointing out the most recent, and the one furthest away from the “blame Bush” mantra. Obama has had this baby for 4 years and the latest quarter is negative and it was during the Holidays which traditionally is a good quarter……it wasn’t.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 5th, 2013
7:54 pm
Sailfish: the pump must be primed.
In the past, to get it primed, we always put the money back into the hands of those, who need it and will spend it, i.e. tax cuts. That is why this is a “unique” time, to use your words, because for the first time, we are trying fixes that Obama think fit his ideology. For the first time, we have abandoned what worked to get us out of previous recessions, are are winging it to satisfy Obama’s ideology.
I am not an economist, but some of them say that the recession of the early 1980’s was just as bad, with 20% inflation, 10% unemployment, gas prices through the roof, gas lines around the block, and car dealer lots loaded with big gas guzzlers. Reagan got us out of that mess much quicker than Obama has tackled this mess. 4 years and little sign of improvement.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
7:58 pm
OK, I’ll concede the point, obozo isn’t a true socialist and most real socialists would probably laugh in hi scrawny face. Putin does all the time.
So how do we define this new, putrid form of marxism your girl practices? Let’s call it obotulism.
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
7:59 pm
rafe md
If you cannot see how the housing bust is unique to this recession then the point is moot. If you don’t think that the storm in the northeast affected xmas spending then I can’t help you either. Spring is when this economy is poised to get some steam, we’ll see.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 5th, 2013
8:01 pm
On Feb. 5, 1963, 50 years ago this week, President John F. Kennedy addressed Congress on “Mental Illness and Mental Retardation.” He proposed a new program under which the federal government would fund community mental-health centers, or CMHCs, to take the place of state mental hospitals. As Kennedy envisioned it, “reliance on the cold mercy of custodial isolations will be supplanted by the open warmth of community concern and capability.”
And that, ladies and gentleman, is how getalife was unleashed upon us.
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
8:02 pm
aesop
Baby, baby stick your head in gravy, wash it off with bubblegum…your name calling is a bit immature but carry on if it makes you feel good.
md
February 5th, 2013
8:03 pm
The storm is an excuse….sure, it may have affected shopping, but on the flip side it boosted other spending from insurance companies and those out trying to replace what they lost. Car sales alone could make up the difference.
“The auto industry wins the silver lining award from the affects of Hurricane Sandy: November car sales jumped 15 percent on strong demand from people replacing cars destroyed by the storm, Americans feeling more confident in the economy, and an easier access to credit.”
Michael H. Smith
February 5th, 2013
8:05 pm
There is a way out of this economic mess Rafe but I doubt many people on this blog will go alone with it anymore than the Dems or GOP in Washington D C will.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 5th, 2013
8:31 pm
MHS
I think had we put that $1T we squandered in the pork fest/stimulus, into tax cuts for everyone, this mess would have corrected itself a great deal sooner. Obama’s years long campaign against the Bush tax cuts, had poisoned the well to such an effect, blaming the economic mess incorrectly on the tax cuts, that this weapon was not available to him. Yet, he was quick to extend the tax cuts and later made them permanent. So, the question is, was he lying during the campaign when he disparaged the cuts, or lying now when he says we need them for the health of the economy.
Hillbilly D
February 5th, 2013
8:52 pm
I see the new format has made it to Jim Galloway’s. Can’t be much longer until it gets here. It seems to be working a bit better on the Sports Side, although every time you refresh it still takes you to the oldest first and only 20 posts per page.
md
February 5th, 2013
8:52 pm
” Yet, he was quick to extend the tax cuts and later made them permanent. So, the question is, was he lying during the campaign when he disparaged the cuts, or lying now when he says we need them for the health of the economy.”
Best I can tell, he uses them as a campaign tool…..how hard is it for a snakeoil salesman to sell snake oil if the guy standing next to you is going to pay for it……
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
9:04 pm
rafe
I guess its ok to cut everyone a one time check and add to the deficit while a stimulus creating jobs and a weekly paycheck is bad? What kind of logic is that?
Dave
February 5th, 2013
9:16 pm
Kyle, I think the President is serious about the deficits and debt; but, he is going about dealing with the issues in his way, right or wrong. I don’t have much sympathy with Republican sniping as if the party had any any sense, it could have gotten a $4 trillion/$1 trillion spending cut/tax increase deal in late summer 2011. The GOP at that point and and now doesn’t seem to want to govern, it just yells “our way or the highway.” They missed their chance for their way for next couple of years. I hope for the country’s sake they aren’t right.
Sailfish
February 5th, 2013
9:33 pm
aesop
Sorry about my comment earlier, chalk it up to temporary finsanity!
md
February 5th, 2013
9:38 pm
” I don’t have much sympathy with Republican sniping as if the party had any any sense, it could have gotten a $4 trillion/$1 trillion spending cut/tax increase deal in late summer 2011.”
Not exactly…..O & B had a deal until O came back after the fact and wanted more revenue. And the deal they were working on was iffy at best considering Cantor and his allies didn’t like it and Pelosi came out with a press conference saying certain items were a no-no.
Don’t fool yourself to think there was no deal because of just one side……
Dave
February 5th, 2013
9:42 pm
Don’t know the ins and outs and don’t remember that it was O that backed off (I thought it was the new Republican class) but from the Republican point of view, they could have done a lot better then than now.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
9:48 pm
The speaker walked away for something they passed. Raising taxes on the wealthy.
So why don’t the gop take the 4 trillion deal still on the table???
md
February 5th, 2013
9:51 pm
According to Woodward, O made his last offer and B was left to mull it over. When B decided to accept the deal, O then wanted more…..but as I said, that was a deal between 2 guys sitting in a room by themselves without the rest of Congress. Cantor hated it and Pelosi went as far as actually using a presser to say certain things would not be cut, yet those things were in the deal O was supposedly agreeing to……
I think the whole thing was a charade for the election……….
Dave
February 5th, 2013
9:55 pm
Wouldn’t be the first time I suppose.
getalife
February 5th, 2013
9:56 pm
md,
It is still on the table.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 5th, 2013
10:17 pm
Ben: Let’s hear some more specific cuts
——————
OK. Cut the parasite maintenance programs by an amount equal to 2.3% of the budget. And then cut another 2.3% just for fun.
Time to eat your peas, Obozo receptacles.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 5th, 2013
10:31 pm
Seven million will lose insurance under Obama health law
President Obama’s health care law will push 7 million people out of their job-based insurance coverage — nearly twice the previous estimate, according to the latest estimates from the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.
——————————-
“If you like your plan, you can FOAD”
td
February 5th, 2013
11:29 pm
Still think the best way to go is the Penny/Mack plan.
1: Freeze all automatic increases to the budget for 6 years.
2: Actually cut 1% per year across the board for 6 years.
If the Feds can not find 1% per year worth of Waste/fraud and abuse then there is something wrong with them and they all should be fired.
Numbers-R-US
February 6th, 2013
7:07 am
I heard the deficit will drop this year. Most likely due to the elimination of some of the Bush tax cuts that never paid for themselves as Republicans assured us they would. That and reduced war spending. If only the Republicans had done something other than provide lip service with their 2010 jobs campaign, we could be even farther along the road to a full recovery from the Bush Great Recession.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 6th, 2013
7:24 am
Numbers-R-US: the Bush tax cuts that never paid for themselves as Republicans assured us they would
————————
Just for the record, tax revenue increased after Our President Bush implemented His tax cuts.
Don’t fear facts.
Jefferson
February 6th, 2013
7:25 am
When given the WHOLE govt to run, the GOP lost all the credibility by running up the deficit and wrecking the economy. Nobody should expect their methods or ideas to work.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 6th, 2013
7:32 am
5% unemployment, measly $300 billion deficits, AAA credit rating, fewer people on welfare, fewer on SSI disability, 2-3% economic growth…looks a damn sight better than Obozo’s failed record.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 6th, 2013
7:33 am
Oh, and the Democrats were in charge of fiscal matters when the recession started.
TBone
February 6th, 2013
8:12 am
Obviously the costs of buying elections is and will be high for some time.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
February 6th, 2013
8:44 am
“When given the WHOLE govt to run, the GOP lost all the credibility by running up the deficit”
Correct.
“and wrecking the economy.”
Epically incorrect.
indigo
February 6th, 2013
8:45 am
Barry – “our President Bush”
“Your” President Bush got us into two useless wars and turned them into
credit card wars. In one of these wars, the Iraq war, he attempted to fulfill Bible prophecy and caused the deaths of thousands of American troops and the permanent maiming of thousands more. Clearly, this bothers both him and you not a bit.
The huge cost of these wars will burden future generations for many years to come and will make it next to impossible for ANY president to substantially improve our economy.
I hope, with all my heart, for the demise of a Party capable of inflicting so much lasting damage on the American people.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
February 6th, 2013
8:53 am
“Clearly, this bothers both him and you not a bit.”
Clearly, your ability to assume without facts continues unabated.
“The huge cost of these wars will burden future generations for many years to come and will make it next to impossible for ANY president to substantially improve our economy.”
Clearly, your inability to put the spending of two wars into context regarding out total deficit spending continues unabated.
“I hope, with all my heart, for the demise of a Party capable of inflicting so much lasting damage on the American people.”
You’re finally hoping for the demise of the Democrat party, Indigo? Good for you!
Triple Nickel
February 6th, 2013
8:57 am
Indigo, There you go again trying to apply reason and logic to our current fiscal crisis. Relax and enjoy reading the haters comments in this thread. Be grateful most of the country doesn’t hate the same way we love to in Georgia.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
February 6th, 2013
9:00 am
Triple Nickel, reason and logic never enter into any discussion from Indigo’s side.
Ever.
And apparently, not from yours.
curious
February 6th, 2013
9:06 am
Lil Barry,
Too bad you weren’t running the Republican Presidential campaign. Romney would have won in the landslide you predicted.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 6th, 2013
9:07 am
It’s almost as though 9/11 never happened and the Twin Towers are still standing. The UN was never consulted, Congress never voted on them, Bush just whipped out the ole credit card and said “let’s do a war, no, make it two wars.”
Remember, these are the same whackjobs that named obozocare “the affordable care act.”
Real live weirdos all.
Numbers-R-US
February 6th, 2013
9:10 am
Just for the record, tax revenue increased after Our President Bush implemented His tax cuts.
And subsequently tanked on his watch. Just for the record.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 6th, 2013
9:11 am
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the people that obozo and mccain want to give high tech US armaments to -
Women’s Unclean Breasts Cause Diarrhoea, Says Egypt Prime Minister Hisham Qandil
Yep and let’s go kill the ape and pig Jews with our new hotrod airplanes.
Numbers-R-US
February 6th, 2013
9:13 am
Tax revenues are up now thanks to the elimination of some of Bush’s unfunded tax cuts by our President Obama.
Don’t fear the facts, Lil.
curious
February 6th, 2013
9:17 am
Aesop.
Haven’t you figured it out, yet?
Kyle’s blog is trick by the Feds to keep you distracted from inflicting damage on society in general.
The more they keep you here, the less damage elsewhere.
indigo
February 6th, 2013
9:17 am
Tiberius – 8:53
Wrong again.
Consistent as always.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/12/bush200712
Numbers-R-US
February 6th, 2013
9:18 am
Let us see some numbers:
The deficit in 2012 was 1.1 trillion and the projected deficit for 2013 is 845 billion. That equates to a decline of 23 percent. And Kyle proclaims that we cannot cut spending by 2.3 percent. I’ll see your measly 2.3% and raise you an order of magnitude.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
February 6th, 2013
9:24 am
Uh, Indigo?
An opinion piece in a liberal rag does not an economic argument make, sonny.
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
February 6th, 2013
9:26 am
Reading isn’t your strong suit, is it Numbers?
“Projected”
“Estimated”
CBO is usually wrong in orders of magnitude even you can’t match.
Jefferson
February 6th, 2013
9:37 am
Wrecked, bailouts, deficits…
the red herring
February 6th, 2013
9:54 am
kyle is correct—spending under bush was not good—spending under obama is terrible –it has skyrocketed — if you can’t see this nation has a spending problem then you probably shouldn’t vote.
Try taking out a mastercard in your name and every month keep on spending more than you make—then go to your boss and tell him you need a 50% pay hike because you can’t control your spending. See if he thinks you have an income problem or a spending problem—see if mastercard thinks you have a spending problem or an income problem—see if the courts think you have a spending or income problem. That simple enough??
Tiberius - pulling the tail of the left AND right when needed
February 6th, 2013
10:01 am
“That simple enough??”
For intelligent people, yes.
For liberals, no.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 6th, 2013
9:18 pm
Numbers-R-US: tax revenue increased after Our President Bush implemented His tax cuts…And subsequently tanked on his watch. Just for the record.
———————–
That can happen when folks stop paying their mortgages and cause financial meltdowns. Good thing Our President Bush fixed that before he left and the recession ended a few short months later, in June 2009.