Obama the BUDGET BUSTER! {defense budget} ''The overall bill is $9 billion less than President Barack Obama sought''. Obama the Nobel peace prize winner is out of control! Tea party guru Dr.Ron paul ''''There is nothing wrong with describing Conservatism as protecting the Constitution, protecting all things that limit government. Government is the enemy of liberty. Government should be very restrained. ''

Is Obama crazy wanting to raise taxes during near depression era economic times? Mitch Mconnel on {obamanomics}''McConnell said on "Fox News Sunday." "We think it's a terrible idea. It's a job-killer." RONALD REAGAN: ''Republicans believe the best way to assure prosperity is to generate more jobs. The Democrats believe in more welfare.''

One would think the 2.16 Trillion would be enough to run our government. With that kind of revenue we should have a tax surplus.

yep, the Reagan / bush trickle down theory has worked wonders....it has been proved that is does NOT create new jobs.....

peace lover, stop watching fox for your news....it is a tabloid based outlet.....warren buffett said last week that tax revenue increase WITH debt reduction measures is the ONLY way this can get done and frankly id trust buffett over McConnell any day!

Take a look at these two sites, and then explain how any GOP candidate could ever be elected based on these finance and economic positions. The Democrats should be all over this, every election, from president to dog catcher. I don't get it. Supply side economics doesn't work. It's a fraud. We've had 30 years of proof. We know what happens. The top richer, the middle class stays the same, the poor get poorer and the debt explodes.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

If this administration can't pay the debt now, what makes them think they can pay it with a higher debt ceiling. Slash big government spending now..!!

me, Obama said that this is his "Bottom Up" recovery, and we see how well that is working. Check your numbers. Unemployment went down under Reagan. Obama would have a hard time saying the same of his administration. BTW, how does creating a welfare state create jobs in the private sector?

What ever happened to Obama's pledge of no more pork? The very first budget he sined, and once he signed it it was his, was full of pork. Of course the Democrats found away around the whole budget issure, they just don't pass them. Last year neither the senate nor the congress passed a budget, and this year Harry Reids senate still has not come out with a budget.

First we were told that we hit our spending limit a month ago. Then we heard, well no, we have enough to go till Aug2. But Obama says we need a deal within 10 days.

Now we here all these estimates of only reductions in the size of projected growth over the next 10 years. Possibly some Mills, or Bills, or Trills here and there. 'If' there are tax hikes, or no tax hikes, or potential tax hikes.

It's all BS.

The real problem is right in front of us for all to see. We need to reduce Federal Outlays by a TRILLION and a HALF this year. PERIOD! And we need to do the same thing (have a balanced, very nearly balanced, or even a surplus budget) every year after.

Obama and his Statist Tyrant crowd can not continue their mad spending spree. No matter what it takes, DRACONIAN SPENDING CUTS are in order.

It is pretty clear that there are no statesmen left in Washington. They are all selfish and they all have their own agendas that are being steared by lobbyists and their egos. They care more about a bridge to nowhere or a park being named after them than how badly they damage the U.S. economy. The worst of this recession is NOT OVER because the Senate and Congress do not know what they are doing. We need to vote them all out and start over. If the U.S. government were still just involved in keeping up the roads and sustaining the armed forces rather than trying to fine tune the whole economy, we would all be better off.

This is nothing more than thinking about the 2012 elections by both sides, instead of thinking about the American People. In the end they will get something passed, that will not make them look bad at the elections, but in the end WE the people are the ones who will get screwed.

And if no deal gets done and we default, WE the people get screwed even more and without even a lubricant

Night Hawk, yep. This is Kabuki theater. It is all for show. Both parties are posturing for the next election cycle. Both are guilty of the "party first" mentality. We will get some form of half ass-ed plan which both parties will blame on the other guys. In the mean time the debt rolls on. Hard decisions have to be made, but they are not coming from our current batch of political leaders.

"Peace lover", you're nuts......!

Well, let's see if the Lefties can continue to collapse any discussion they don't want to see (see thread 2.11 below).

What was on the table in the "grand deal" was tax reform and reduction in entitlement spending to the tune of 4 $Trillion. Not what I was looking for but a really good start. But then HERE COMES Nancy P into the mix and she kills the deal. I guess she wants a bill we need to pass first to see what's in it!

Cut, Cap and Balance! NOW!

"Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner cautioned Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press" that a package about half the size of the one Obama prefers would be equally tough to negotiate because it, too, could require hundreds of billions in new tax revenue — anathema to Republicans."

Translation = The Democrats are not willing to make serious cuts in spending, so they want more money to spend.

The debt issue is a real problem for the Democrats, so they just wanted to 'kick the can' far enough down the road to get past the 2012 elections, but the Republicans want to revive it as an issue during those elections.

The "raise on taxes" will be on those who got reductions, the rich. It will be returning it to what it was which is higher than it is now, so I guess you can spin it as a raise.

I cannot believe all the middle and lower economic class Americans who will not support themselves, but corporations, which want to control our government and those who make obscene profits and bonuses! Even the Wall Streeters, bankers, hedge fund managers, etc. ! It is simply amazing. It only attests to the control they have given Rupert Murdoch over them. Amazing. Why would anyone give themselves away to a political philosophy, much less one that has put them in the ecomonic position they are in and desires to keep them there? They say ignorance is bliss but I have yet to see a happy Republican since before Bush/Cheney. And "trickle down" economics? 30 years is time enough to see that it doesn't work! It trickles up and stays there! What are you people thinking?!!! What la-la land are you living in? Have you not looked away from your tabloid TV long enough to see what is really happening in our country and the world? Do you even care?

hey mr speaker: lets do it like you handled the CR. start with 4 trillion in cuts, then cave to 1 trillion in cuts, then bend over and accept $350 thousand in cuts (in 10-15 years), but this time add 2 trillion in tax increases (immediately). go ahead, and hope we wont remember come next election.

idiot.

RONALD REAGAN: ''Republicans believe the best way to assure prosperity is to generate more jobs. The Democrats believe in more welfare.''

Things have not changed in the last 30 years, have they?

it's the republicans that don't want any deal, they want to crash the economy, that's what their about, now they want to go back to the Biden talks that they walked out of? ...... incredible

Absolutely great point Roy!

AnIndividual "The "raise on taxes" will be on those who got reductions, the rich. It will be returning it to what it was which is higher than it is now, so I guess you can spin it as a raise."

Since about 82% of the Bush tax cuts went to the middle/poor classes, are you willing to let their taxes also 'return to what it was'? It will supposedly raise another $3.1 Trillion from the middle/poor classes over 10 years, along with $700 Billion from the 'rich'. That $3.8 Trillion will go a long way toward reducing the deficit, but at what cost to the economic 'recovery'.

yeah, they kinda have changed Roy,

30 years ago top management wasn't making 75 or 100 million each year !!!

We had a healthy middle class 30 years ago !!

Mothers didn't have to work to provide enough money for a family to survive !!

I'm still waiting for all of you negative posters to post YOUR budget plan, showing just where you would trim the budget (with a full understanding of how each and every department/agency works, their legal responsibilities per the laws passed by Congress, etc.) without raising any taxes. The first step that needs to be done is for Congress to pass a gross income tax system with NO deductions of any kind. Set four levels of tax rates based on income.......first $25K - 75K (that limit to be determined) tax free, next $200K of income at 15%, next $250K of income at 30%, and anything over that level at 45%. Eliminate all other forms of taxes....capital gains, estate, etc. since ALL income would have to be included as the gross income upon which the taxes are based.

Along with this must be a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution (even though that can take decades to get passed by the required number of states.)

banker boy

30 years ago 75 million dollars was worth more than it is today, too! The US dollar has been devalued over the years. Hey! soon we can all be Billionaires and not able to buy anything.

Since Congress (not the President) sets spending, the budget and deficits and legislation, what does the record show with regard to jobs created and deficits over the last 30 years;

Jobs created when Democrats controlled Congress (12 years) = 8,100,000 net new jobs.
Jobs created when Republicans controlled Congress (10 years) = 21,773,000 net new jobs.
Jobs created when Congress was split (8 years) = 9,888,000 net new jobs.

And on the Deficits;

Deficits when Democrats controlled Congress (12 years) = $5.022 Trillion.

Deficits when Republicans controlled Congress (10 years) = $1.219 Trillion.

Deficits when there was a split Congress (8 years) = $1.063 Trillion

Clearly, Republican Congresses helped 'create' jobs and controlling spending, while Democratic Congresses have a poor jobs/spending record.

Sources - Democrats controlled Congress from 1987 – 1994, and from 2007 – 2010. Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 – 2000, and from 2003 – 2006. There was a split Congress from 1980 – 1986 and for 2001 & 2002. Deficits are from the following White House site;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

The government site to verify average employment by year is;

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf

PS - For those who question my figures - You have the sources quoted, so look them up for yourself and try to prove me wrong - if you can.

We've simply got to get spending under control. The government cannot be everyone's babysitter, safety net, and parents all rolled into one. We just don't have the money. Yes, we need more revenue. But you don't get it by raising the tax rates on those who are working. That kills the goose that is laying the golden eggs. You raise revenue by providing an environment where businesses flourish and hire more people (thus creating more taxpayers). The democrats would like to see government with a bigger slice of a shinking pie, where the republicans would prefer policies to grow the size of the pie.

I live in Indiana, where we have resisted the temptation to raise taxes through the roof to cover budget shortfalls. Instead, the state government has sought to make the state more business friendly and rein in costs. And an amazing thing has happened. Companies are moving here, and businesses are beginning to hire and expand. And what has followed? State tax revenues have exceeded earlier projections. There are TWO ways to get more taxes: One is to raise the tax rates. The other is to have more taxpayers. This second one is the one that democrats always seem to forget about, and it's the one that leads to prosperity and sustained growth.

What would happen if we re-signed the original Constitution & Bill of Rights? Held fresh elections for those offices laid out by the Founders and fire the rest of the Federal Government. Envision rebuilding America from scratch. What would that look like?

It is the Congress's job to compromise.

That is the jobs description, that's why there are more than one congressman, so that they compromise to the solution.

Even before the US constitution was written and signed our forefathers had the ability to compromise, the writers of the constitution gradually worked out a system of plans and compromises that they believed would create a strong central government without depriving the states of all sovereign authority.

The Congress was created by a compromise.

It was called the Great Compromise

During the summer of 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia established equal representation in the Senate and proportional representation in the House of Representatives... Called the "Great Compromise" or the "Connecticut Compromise," this unique plan for congressional representation resolved the most controversial aspect of the drafting of the Constitution.

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Constitution_Senate.htm

If the sitting senators and congressman continue to scoff at compromise they will be abandoning the very reason the three tiers of government were created.

Our forefathers and today's US citizens expect our Congressman and President to compromise and do the business they were elected and are paid to do.

It should not come as a shock to those publicly elected officials who refuse to compromise that the US public will not re-elect them, and further if needed call for their removal from office.

The US Congress and the US president has one month to pull their heads out of the sand and get busy with the nations business. If the inability to compromise causes this nation to default, and pushes the US economy into a true depression, then words such as treason should be placed on the table thereafter.

We the people are tired of being beaten up by treasonous Bankers, colluded Futures traders, and immature, mathematically-challenged, politicians who pander to the special interest groups.

If you cannot compromise, excuse yourself from the vote, hand in your resignation letter, and let those men and women who can do the business of the United States.

Over the last 10 years, revenues have increased by 21% while inflation has been around 23-24%. However spending has increased over 60%...

And people can honestly say we have a revenue problem?

I loved it when Geithner blamed the bad economy on the weather Yupper, those Harvard boys are just really smart guys. The only problem is, their academia "Theories" don't work.

Chip--source for your stats please?

The republicans cannot claim to be serious about reducing the deficit when they absolutely refuse to consider raising taxes on the rich and getting rid of tax breaks for oil companies. Even their hero, Ronald Reagan understood the need to raise revenue to balance the budget. Reagan, in fact, raised taxes quite a few times.

Since the Reagan years, taxes on wealthy individuals and corporations have grown steadily lower. The economy, on the other hand, is in shambles. Clearly, endless tax breaks for the wealthy have not translated to more jobs. Very much to the contrary, the unemployment has increased, not decreased.

The republican "plan" for cutting the deficit seems to involve asking the middle class to make sacrifice after sacrifice after sacrifice -- yet they absolutely refuse to even consider asking the rich to make sacrifices. That's unfair and -- more importantly -- history shows that it won't work. When you cut benefits for middle class Americans, they have less money to spend. That means that sales will decrease for many stores, which means that jobs will be lost.

We could balance the budget very quickly if both sides would agree to:

1. Sharply decrease defense spending

2. End the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

3. End the tax breaks for oil companies.

It was on Morning Joe Thursday... I think either Mika or Dr. Sachs had brought it up...

Later Sen. Demint confirmed it. You can figure it out yourself by using this great site called Google too!

Mr. PheaNiques is right in this case, and it is completely a game run by both sides. And he is right about raising the debt ceiling, in the sense of that if you do, and yet have a deal that reduces our debt so we don't have to raise it again, you did your job.

If you don't do your job, being a Republican or Democrat won't save you. They know it, and that's why when public anger really starts coming down on them, you'll suddenly find a 'miracle' deal reached. Drama, fabricated by your elected officials and news.

banker-boy

You misunderstood my post. I am not comparing 30 years ago with today - I am giving you the results of Democratic and Republican Congresses over the last 30 years.

If an employee made so many big mistakes & cost the company money, to a point that the company is no longer making a profit, what would his employer be forced do to stay in business & keep the business profitable??

This is what must happen to America's big government..!!

Pink slips & pay cuts. Tax the politicians on any contribution..

All I can say is Banker Boy...

How is a healthy middle class equal to 500K in debt for car, house, and boat? The US has not had a healthy middle class since the Korean Conflict.

The liberals answer is always to raise taxes rather than cut spending. Well, most of us have no way to just tax someone else to get more money when we overspend so we STOP SPENDING!!!! Cut the pork and stop handing money to lazy welfare babes who pop out another fatherless kid when they want a raise. It's not that tough, if we didn't have a bunch of morons in congress we might get somewhere.

@GuyLittle (and all you "quit spending" zealots)

"Slash big government spending now..!!"

Well, Guy, where was your austerity bug when Republicans were spending all that money for tax breaks for the rich and corporate welfare and elective wars?

Republican's seem to think it should all come out of the skin of the middle-class, elderly and the poor (a class of folks of which you are probably a member).

Why do you think giving the upper 1-2% ALL the money in this country is "a good thing?"

Republicans keep saying they need it to create jobs. They've been saying that for at least 30 years. Where are those "jobs."

Ever notice the only thing "trickling down" smells a lot like urine?

Roy, then why the heck are the republicans in congress asking Obama "Where are the jobs Mr. President?" I'm still to see a single jobs bill by the new republican majority in the house.

Oh and a few months ago Boehner himself was saying the government doesn't create jobs.... The republican party needs to get their story straight.

Chip--with all respect, hearing someone state something on a tv show in no way makes it a "fact". And yes, that goes for all, Republican and Democrat. And Google, come on...everything out there true? Yeah, right....

PeAcE LoVeR-2838047
Is Obama crazy wanting to raise taxes during near depression era economic times? Mitch Mconnel on {obamanomics}''McConnell said on "Fox News Sunday." "We think it's a terrible idea. It's a job-killer." RONALD REAGAN: ''Republicans believe the best way to assure prosperity is to generate more jobs. The Democrats believe in more welfare.''

Spending cuts won't create jobs either.

Having cuts AND raising revenues might get our fiscal house in order. It appears Republicans want to destroy our country to get power.

People voted for gridlock in 2010 and that's what they're getting. How is that working?

Boehner is right, the gov't doesn't create jobs. Business creates jobs and will do so when they aren't afraid of being taxes into oblivion by a "tax the rich" scheme.

Thank God that the republicans have become a stopper to Obama and the democrats spending!!! All those democrate hand outs to their rich friends. Or as they say it; rewarding their campaign funders! Just think if the 2010 elections were all won by democrats, we would all nothing left but a debt to the world by 2012!! Are there still people in this country that still think that the Democrate out of control spending was going to get us out of debt???

As for you Reagan haters, tell us how so many jobs were created under his leadership if he was so wrong? Don't want to give up your hand outs and work for what you are worth? Or is it that you are worth so much that you are above having to work for it? We all know that when jobs are available, government cuts back on welfare, and the true hard core democrats hate that! Yep I'm sure that you democrats just love talking about Jimmy Carter, nothing like free government cheese, powder milk, and a bag of slow cooking rice! Why work when we can bring back those great tasting government food items. Remember those great "after" taste from that cheese and powder milk? As for the rice or pasta, not bad, that is if you could wait all day for it to cook! Only democrats with big harts and no taste buds will always pick Obama/Carter over anyone else! When Reagan haters speak up about how much Reagan was wrong, ask them this. How was Carters plan for America so much better then Reagan's plan? How did Carter leadership prevail over Roanld Reagan? Hmmm, It is like comparing a free handful of peanuts to working for a handful cash! As for this old dog, I would prefer to skip the "Obama democrat Carter" life of easy peanuts and go with the Reagan plan of working hard for my American dreams!

elle: Yup, you're right! I hate more taxes. I hate wasteful spending. I hate big bloated gov't. And I also hate lazy bastards who sit on their ass waiting for us TAXPAYERS to pay their way. It's the simple minded liberals like you who are the problem and voted for some snake oil saleman who promoises "change".

Whats ina Name "Roy, then why the heck are the republicans in congress asking Obama "Where are the jobs Mr. President?" "

Because the Democrats controlled Congress for the last 4 years and the Presidency for the last 2 years, and they promised millions of 'saved or created jobs'.

As for jobs bills by the Republican House, it takes two to Tango, and Harry Reid in the Senate has refused to 'dance'. The only thing that will help 'create' jobs is to cut costs and regulations on businesses, and several of the Republican bills to do that are sitting in Harry Reid's pocket, where he has said they will remain.

usa1967

We already tried oil salesmen. Bush and Cheney. How'd that work out?

Elle government creates nothing but debt.!! Growing a government creates a class of voters that are dependent on government for their income, & will vote in favor of more government because they have no obligation to pay for it. Look up the CLOWARD & PIVEN PLAN...

Make these high rolling politicians participate in the same programs as the American people they govern.. Stop this double standard..

How much money is in the Congressional retirement fund?? Why doesn't the media report on this??

The government has enough money coming in from revenue to pay the debt, Social Security, and military pay each month without raising the debt ceiling. We just don't have enough to pay for the extras. Obama has the checkbook in his pocket it looks like he has decided to pay for the EPA, FCC, DHS and not pay for the elderly and military people. It's his and Geithner's decision who get paid. Besides the fact that people who make over $250,000 pay 70% of the taxes already why can't the lower 50% sacrifice a bit since they pay nothing, and at the end of the year gets more back than they even paid in? That's fair.

anti-trust proponent.........It cannot be done without raising taxes, but the tax increases can be minimal for most. Eliminate the mortgage interest deduction or better still, limit it to interest on $2 million in total mortgages so that those with 12 vacation homes and yachts are not cashing in on it, it was never intended for that. Change the Capital Gains Tax so that it is a true long term incentive and not a loophole for billionairre Hedge Fund Managers to get away with a top rate of 15% while working stiffs pay 35% . Raise the top tax rate on income ( and perks ) to what is was in the 50's and 60's on annual income over $2,000,000, with no offsetting deductions allowed over $2 million income.
Social security is an easy fix and not really a defecit issue anyway, just raise the age to 67 over several years and put more income restrictions on it, if you are making a million a year, you don't need social security. They also have let almost anyone with an ingrown toenail get onto SS Disability, I am all for the disability program, just raise the threshold and require six month reevaluations. We all know people who got on disability legitimately but then have ridden the system forever, same is true of many other safety net programs, don't have to eliminate them, just control them. Medicaide is full of waste, but the biggest issue is that once on it, people cannot afford to take a job because they will lose health benefits, so there should be a phase out of benefits, with a small contribution which increases as income increases.
The system can be fixed, but one side has repeatedly stated that they will not compromise on anything and will not increase taxes or close loopholes, even on billionairres and billion dollar companies !

Chip D-2844144 "Over the last 10 years, revenues have increased by 21% while inflation has been around 23-24%. However spending has increased over 60%..."

Here are the correct figures, based on government sources;

Over the last 10 years (2000 through 2010), revenues increased by only 6.8%, while inflation has reduced the purchasing power of a dollar by 21%.

Sources;
For revenues, the White House site;

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

For inflation, the Bureau of Labor Statistics site;

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat1.pdf

So Roy, they have time to waste by submitting a bill to de-fund NPR because they are supposedly biased, and to de-fund planned parenthood because they support abortions, even though they have no chance to pass in the senate. But they keep the jobs bill in their coat pocket because it can't pass the senate. Not even a vote on principle. I'm sorry, but I call BS.

@Roy Wilson

Your figures must have come to you in some kind of drug-induced, wet dream - and boy it must have been a REAL good trip - 'cause you're so far out there there in la-la land of delusion there's no way I'm going to spend the time it would take to tear it apart...lol.

Republican's have historically been the "big spenders," (not Democrats), running up big deficits distributing corporate welfare to fill up their capitalists buddies coffers with government money.

See the chart in the middle of this page. All the "red ink" is Republican administrtions.

Supply side economics (trickle down) is a demonstrably failed ideology, that has never - and will never - create jobs. It's just one of the ways Republicans have successfully bent the art of fiscal policy in the US to funnel money into the pockets of the rich.

You can continue to live in fantasy land about Republican ideology, or you can give up your hate and join the party that REALLY has your bests interest in mind....your choice....just sayin'

Perhaps we should all take a deep breath, and read a very, very interesting and recent study. We are all fighting tooth and nail from different perspectives when we all really want the same things. Looks like the only thing to do is fire all the politicians and start having meaningful conversations.

Since I know many won't click to go read, here is the highlights. 1) We are ALL underestimating how much the top tier holds in wealth of this country. 2) Regardless of voting R or D, we all basically desire a similar wealth distribution scenario. 3) The desired wealth distribution model is similar to that of Sweden!

Believe it or not, we all have an inherent sense of fairness. Look at the chart showing the reality of wealth distribution in this country. It cannot continue in that way for very much longer. For those of you fighting for the upper echelons to continue to make a killing, all I can say is, you must be on their payroll to fight for them.

"I would hope that there is enough bipartisan intelligence and understanding of the challenge that is ahead of the United States, but also the rest of the world," she said.

I hope she isn't holding her breath....as I shake my head and sigh thinking about what US politics has become

All I have to say is I'm absolutely tired of all the stupid BS that is going on. I feel that no one on either side truly wants to make the sacrifices needed to get something done and as always they are just worried about keeping their seat in Congress/Senate. Just do your damm jobs, get a deal done, and do it now! I don't give two sh!t$ about party lines - both sides have more than enough blame one way or another!!America stop drinking the kool aide that either side is serving , think for yourselves, and a finally look at the whole picture. The division they keep between us is the real source of our politicians power and is slowly killing us all because we are letting that division blind us, plain and simple. Both sides keep playing kick the can and now time has run out. If we really want to have any hope then big changes are going to need to be made. (term limits, revised tax system (I say fair tax), controlled spending and cuts where needed, balanced budget, full transparency, lobbyists stopped, ect - just to name a few - though I give highest priority to the first two I listed) That means both sides are going to have to give in and in this case the agreement really needs to be on the bigger option. That means some services are going to have to be cut and some tax breaks are going to have to go bye bye. We can't keep going with the status quo; status quo is getting ready to send the ship over the waterfall and to a point of no return. It is time America. Speak up! Demand a change. Demand our politicians do their jobs and actually introduce legislation that will finally start to solve some issues (see my list above) and not skirt around them or pass it on to the next generation. The time is now!

Junicon

The republican "plan" for cutting the deficit seems to involve asking the middle class to make sacrifice after sacrifice after sacrifice -- yet they absolutely refuse to even consider asking the rich to make sacrifices. That's unfair and -- more importantly -- history shows that it won't work

I would like an honest answer to a few things.

First, just what percentage should the so called "rich" have to give up of their income to be paying their "fair share? Now before you answer that consider these numbers.

Top 0.1% -- Income over $1,800,000 -- 18.47% of federal taxes

Top 1% -- Income over $380,000 -- 38.02%

Top 5% -- Income over $160,000 -- 58.72%

Top 10% -- Income over $114,000 -- 69.94%

Top 25% -- Income over $67,000 -- 86.34%

Top 50% -- Income over $33,000 -- 97.3%

Bottom 50% -- Income under $33,000 -- 2.7%

(source: 2008 Federal Tax Data from IRS)

The top 5% of wage earners are already paying almost 60% of the federal tax burden while the bottome 47% pay nothing.

Second, would you be willing to support a Flat Tax set at 17% on all monies earned over $15,000 with the elimination of all tax deductions, credits, and exemptions? 20 countries have done this with Russia being the first and all have see increases in revenue to the central government will all citizens being taxed equally. (Russia saw increases of revenue of 21% the first year and another 20% the second year)

Third, are you willing to enforce our immigration laws and pass a real e-Verify law that has teeth to it to remove illegal aliens from taking jobs that the 15 million unemployed Americans can be doing?

And last of all, are you willing to admit that our current $14 trillion debt is nothing when compared to the $101 trillion in unfunded liabilities that are in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid? That is almost the total net worth of the United States economy. These programs are ticking time bombs and the countdown is getting closer all the time, they need to be drastically restructured or outright eliminated, we do not have the means at all to refund these programs.

The highest unemployment rate in the post World War II era was 10.8% and that occurred a couple of years into the Reagan term of office.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

there you go..... ; - )

So the study won't link to Newsvine, why am I not surprised? *sarcasm* Anyway, it is entitled Building a Better America - One Quintile At a Time and it was done by Michael I. Norton/ Harvard Business School and Dan Ariely/ Duke University. Fantastic study, nice cross sampling of the country.

Elle - wrong - if you look at who spends the money, you know, CONGRESS, when democrats controlled congress, deficits went up substantially more than when Republicans controlled Congress.

Here is the link with the facts: http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

Sorry to disappoint, but no drugs were needed in order to understand the chart.

And you can go on and on about who inherited what, but the fact is that democrats voted for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and funded them through 2011. So Obama and the democrats, who controlled congress for 4 years prior to Nov 2010, fully funded and supported these two conflicts.

And now Obama has added a new war without Congressional approval.

They also have done nothing about the middle class, nothing about jobs, and Obama's best buddy is the CEO of GE, the biggest tax dodger in the US.

Obama has transferred more wealth to fewer people in less time than any President in history. He gave out hundreds of billions to insurance, Wall St and banking big wigs. Yeah, a real man of the people.

Well, usa1957, believe it or not, the “bloated government” you “hate” is mostly Republicans funneling government money to their capitalist buddies – which you are supporting by voting for them because you “perceive” (wrongly…lol) that welfare as a “bigger” expense. It just isn’t.

AND - “Welfare” IS a larger part of spending now than it WAS before the Republican-caused economic disaster of 2007-8. As long as this is a humanitarian country (where we prefer not to have the bodies of dead children littering the streets) we will be taking care of our poor and indigent, but the % of the “lazy ass sitters” you’r efixated on is very small….their “large” numbers only a figment of the treadmill of your hate.

Elle-1709289 "@Roy Wilson Your figures must have come to you in some kind of drug-induced, wet dream"

I quoted the government sources, so prove me wrong- if you can (many have tried, unsuccessfully).

You must be one of those who say "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's already made up".

Wizard,

What you forgot to mention is the wealth that the top 5% have. It's well over the 60% they pay in tax.

Why don't you tell the WHOLE truth? That's what people want. They don't want partisan, spun, half truths that both parties use (unfortunately I hear Republicans do it a lot more).

First, the Republicans wanted the CBO to measure legislation. Then, when the numbers didn't go their way when healthcare reform was done, they said CBO shouldn't be trusted.

Most Americans know exactly what's right to do. Have a balanced approach where spending cuts and tax hikes to those making over $250K expire in 2013 (not NOW).

@StoptheCannibals. Here's the problem with only taxing the wealthy: If you set the tax brackets to the highest in American history, which was under Eisenhower, when the top tax bracket was 90% (and note, Baggers, we survived it and it was under a Repyube), we STILL could not pay off our national debt.

So where would the other money come from?

Well, CUTS, and ending our wars would help, but still wouldn't be enough, so the kind of cuts Democrats have to finally accept. OR we also raise taxes even higher on the middle class. You ready for that? Higher than the Eisenhower period. Do that, and you can bet you'll get thrown out of office.

So all mouth foamers should take a pill and start thinking. This WILL be a compromise, because radicalism, AS USUAL will not provide the answer.

That's typical. They just quote the facts that are convenient to their argument, and ignore the ones that aren't. They are no better than the liars they defend.

Derek,

I said to make cuts to spending too. That, with tax hikes comes to $4 Trillion. That's enough. don't try to spin that into only doing tax hikes or that the cuts won't be enough.

StoptheCannibals-2908428 "Wizard,What you forgot to mention is the wealth that the top 5% have. It's well over the 60% they pay in tax."

Are you suggesting that we should not tax people based on their income, but just confiscate people's property instead? I suppose that you would also propose that the confiscation only apply to people that have more than you do.

We've seen examples of government's that confiscate other people's property, typically in Africa, but it has invariably led to a collapse of their economies and hyperinflation.

If that's your 'solution', I doubt that it will generate much support - except among the poor (who would have nothing to lose and would love somebody else's money to spend).

LET"S GO! excuse me mr president.... i am not holding you back:) most of us can agree that we won't mind if you go:) and by that i mean AT ALL! GET OUT OF OFFICE! LET SOMEONE WHO KNOWS HOW MANY STATES THERE ARE IN THIS COUNTRY LEAD!

just look for yourself how bad of shape we are in. It is rather scary.

Stop the blame game , everyone is an equal offender. Flat tax no exemptions.

The House of Representatives has the RESPONSIBILITY of presenting the budget proposal. What part of that does Mr. Obama fail to understand ? It is THEIR constitutionally named power.......... not yours Mr. President ! You want to whip them into doing YOUR bidding while spending us deeper into debt !!

Somehow, through all of this, Obama wants the power to dictate what the budget deal will be.

Our country must live within its income!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@stop the cannibals, You are right, sorry. Not trying to spin something, by the way. Just mistook your post for something because I did miss the part you mentioned.

Anyway, somewhere in another article I was mentioning some obvious cuts you'd get the general public to support. Expect the radicals of both sides to be very unhappy with the deal, but thinking people to be fine with it as long as it gets us off the non-stop debt increases.

Roy Wilson, you are right on the money! Revenues are fine, they need to STOP spending! But, the liberals are like "Real Housewives of Orange County"! They are not happy unless they spend, spend, spend! Throw money at any problem, and it will go away? No, it gets us to the impasse in which we find ourselves today! Thank you Roy!

Tax breaks are the exact same thing as expenditures. Money that leaves is the same as money that never comes in. How about we start there.

wlee-950886
Stop the blame game , everyone is an equal offender. Flat tax no exemptions.

wlee, assuming the IRS takes in the same it does now, who will pay more under a flat tax, who will pay less, and who will pay the same? Who would be the "winners" and who would be the "losers"?

It doesn't matter whether you can fill out your tax return on a post card. It's the amount of the check you need to write when you send it in that matters.

I can guarantee that the rich will pay less and the middle class will pay more under a flat tax, so why should the middle class ever support a flat tax when they lose?

StoptheCannibals-2908428

What you forgot to mention is the wealth that the top 5% have. It's well over the 60% they pay in tax.

I did not mention any such thing. What you are advocating with such a statement is that the government should be taxing the "rich's" accumulated wealth and not just their income. That is wrong on so many levels it is not funny. We are talking INCOME tax here and not instituting a wealth tax, wait we already have that, it is called the death or estate tax.

Why don't you tell the WHOLE truth? That's what people want. They don't want partisan, spun, half truths that both parties use (unfortunately I hear Republicans do it a lot more).

Where did I leave anything out honestly? (BTW - I am neither a Republican nor Democrat)

Most Americans know exactly what's right to do. Have a balanced approach where spending cuts and tax hikes to those making over $250K expire in 2013 (not NOW).

In this country where all persons were supposed to be created equal why is taxing the rich at a higher percentage rate and to also now talk of removing some of the most basic deductions that all Americans get either fair or equal? Especialy with 47% of wage earners paying no federal income tax at all?

StoptheCannibals-2908428

wlee, assuming the IRS takes in the same it does now, who will pay more under a flat tax, who will pay less, and who will pay the same? Who would be the "winners" and who would be the "losers"?

Look at Warren Buffet, it was quite publicized that he paid less in taxes than his secretary, under a flat tax of 17% with only a deduction of $15,000 he would pay one heck of alot more in taxes than would his secretary. That is FAIR.

Estimates put the flat tax as generating a 20-25% increase in revenue to the fed and it would be a shared burden by everyone. Please stop with the class warfare, it does no good to the overall discussion for this problem.

Flat tax is a dream, and it should be given up. I am not even going to argue the ideology of it, but it will never happen, period.

Dakota

WRONG!! Here are the Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers from 1981 to 1989 Reagan's years in Office.

1981
7.6

1982
9.7

1983
9.6

1984
7.5

1985
7.2

1986
7.0

1987
6.2

1988
5.5

1989
5.3

This is the Obama depression, and this inept fool who never singed a paycheck in his life is who you drones support. enough said.

Wizard:Look at Warren Buffet, it was quite publicized that he paid less in taxes than his secretary, under a flat tax of 17% with only a deduction of $15,000 he would pay one heck of alot more in taxes than would his secretary. That is FAIR.

Estimates put the flat tax as generating a 20-25% increase in revenue to the fed and it would be a shared burden by everyone. Please stop with the class warfare, it does no good to the overall discussion for this problem.

First, you never did answer the question about who loses and who benefits from a flat tax. It's the poor and middle class who suffers most under a flat tax, and where the rich does better off. You went right to Warren Buffett and totally misstated what he said - not uncommon when trying to make your viewpoint appear valid.

Second, Warren Buffet does pay income taxes (and plenty). What he said was his RATE was much lower than his secretary (because of payroll taxes his secretary pays too - that's capped for him).

Third, getting a 20 -25% increase in revenue would mean WHAT rate? Using your 17%, everyone making $250K or less would then pay MORE and those making over $250K would pay LESS (and you think that's fair and class warefare?).

We have a progressive tax system for a reason. A person making $25K with a flat tax of 17% (and 15K exemption) would have $23,300 to live on after the tax. A person making $250,000 would have $210,050 to live on (guess who suffers more).

And for those who just hammer on the 46% who do not pay any income tax.....some of those 46% are making lots of money - and use other loopholes to reduce or eliminate tax, some are part time workers, families living on a minimum wage job, those unemployed a large part of the year, and, some freeloaders.

Lastly, those that praise the virtues of small business and don't want them to pay a dime more in taxes (and I admire those in business, but) don't think all those small business are as innocent as you might think. They also love to writeoff personal expenses, meals and entertainment, football/baseball/hockey tickets, hire all of their family members, pay them well, help fund their retirement (and all while some never show up for work). They know how to play the game too, just like the freeloaders you all like to blame living it up on the $300 a week they get from welfare.

Speedy,

And we're just supposed to believe that because you just say it? Repeating what Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin say makes it true?

Actually, it seems more marxist for a group to all wake up at the same time, get in a line when ordered, all dress the same, and all cohabitate in the same dorm rooms - like our military.

Derek @ #1.83,

You are correct. The flat tax is a dream and its implications really could get wild when defining "income". Other than CPA's, you would be opening a true "can of worms".

One of the basic principles of taxation is that it should be based on ABILITY TO PAY......in other words, those that make more get taxed at a higher incremental rate. This is what we have today although some could reasonably argue that the wealthiest should be paying a little higher percentage.

Another principle is that it UNDERSTANDABLE and Lord knows, although he might not be sure, our country has gotten away from simplicity over many years through many administrations. The complexity is now enormous.

One final principle is that it should be FAIR ...... and we could start a discussion going on for months about that one !! Is it fair that someone making over $10 million/year might be taxed at the same rate as someone making $800k ? Should some be paying no federal income tax at all ?? Is it fair for tax credits to wipe out ALL tax liability ??? Is it fair that the top 10% of earners pay about 60% of the taxes (not sure of numbers, but for illustration purposes only) ????

slodon....WRONG!!!!!!

On December 3, 1982 The Labor Department reported that the unemployment rate was at a whopping 10.6%, which was the highest level since 1940. Here's another little tidbit of info also. When Reagan took office, the country was headed in a downward spiral just like when Obama took over. Reagan cut taxes, cut social programs and reduced regulation and the result wasn't what he expected. Yeah, Reagan talked a good game, but at the end of the day, what was Reagan's response? He INCREASED TAXES!!!!!!!!!!! That's why it was imperative that George H.W. distinguish himself with his "Read my lips; no new taxes" at the convention in 1988.

Stopthecannibals,how is it not fair if everyone is paying the same percentage on their income? If you want more money then you will try to better yourself. Either way you will be paying the same rate.

“I will not sign a 30-day, or a 60-day, or a 90-day, or a 180-day extension: that is just not an acceptable approach,” he told reporters at a White House press conference. “If we think it’s hard now, imagine how these guys (in Congress) are going to be thinking six months from now, in the middle of an election season when they’re all up.

So what the president is saying to congress is to act without thinking, without planning because it's too much trouble for him to DO HIS JOB instead of campaigning???

I won't vote for anyone that just accepts whatever is proposed so they can campaign more efficiently and not be bothered by DOING THEIR JOB.

He said an extension of the Social Security payroll tax cut, which Congress enacted last December and which is set to expire at the end of this year, ought to be part of any accord, as should an extension of unemployment insurance benefits, and the creation of a new federal bank to finance infrastructure projects.

WHAT??? He wants to spend MORE money??

"If you don't do the revenues, then to get the same amount of savings, you have to add more cuts, which means it's seniors, it's poor kids, it's medical researchers or our infrastructures that suffer," Obama added.

How about getting the money for the poor kids, the researchers and the infrastructure by scrapping some of your special interest money Mr. President? How about sending the money you planned on sending to Pakistan, El Salvador, Brazil and China to the poor people in THIS country? How about scrapping about 15 of the superflous government agencies, the high speed train, the coal plant, and all the special interest research money so that there is money for the elderly?

Obama said public wasn’t paying attention to the details of the debt ceiling debate, but people would soon feel the effects of a “crisis of confidence” in financial markets if Congress did not raise the borrowing limit.

Oh yes they are paying attention....nothing like having the president being condescending to the public. How about ONE detail Mr. President? Show us one dime in savings!

There is no reason to raise the debt ceiling and I'm more against it everyday. The government needs to learn to live on 2.4 trillion a year.

Fair tax anyone???? I always see the flat tax argument but what about fair tax? See it now and then but not near as much. Liked to hear the thoughts on that, seriously. But I will admit I'm to the point where I'd say almost anything is better than what we have now, unfortunate as that is. From what I've read fair tax seems to beat them all at this point and that's why I would like to hear more thoughts on it.

One of the things flat taxers don't look at much is that the higher your wealth, the more influence you have in politics and in society. A higher tax bracket is actually part of that influence. I am NOT saying, therefore, you should raise the taxes through the roof. That would be a silly and naive extrapolation. What I am saying is a tiered tax system is, and will always be, the most popular and best approach to paying taxes.

FYI, a tiered tax system is why we have the various tax-break benefits we do between the wealthy and the government. It is a giant failure of the flat taxers to not address this counterpoint. The vast majority of Americans, which is still the middle class, have absolutely no tolerance (nor should they) for the mass of wealth held by the minority of the very rich in lieu over loss of infrastructure. Do you think that if we eliminated the tax break from municipal bonds and flat taxed the wealthy, that we wouldn't have a massive lost of highway, rail, and port infrastructure? You are lying to yourself if you think we wouldn't. And no amount of government cutting will replace THAT infrastructure cost with a flat tax. So while your wildly rich would love the idea of flying everywhere in a helicopter while joe middle class would be riding a horse across a country (and of course your wildly rich man would be all red faced about how he fairly inhereted the money, LOL), the wildly rich would soon find themselves being strung up and finanically raided by the 'unfair' majority. Think French revolution.

So, all that said, Flat tax is a dream, much like utopian Communism, or any other ideal that has no realistic road to fulfillment.

Sorry but a flat tax is the fairest form of taxation. No matter how much you make it's the same rate, if you want more money ,it's an incentive to better yourself. Why should someone pay more for working harder to achieve what he or she gets

Momus2009

No matter how you try to 'spin' it, Reagan is widely regarded as one of our best Presidents. Over his 8 years in the Presidency;

The economy (GDP) grew by 97% (12.1% per year).

Government Revenues grew by 76% (9.5% per year).

A total of 15,665,000 net new jobs were added (1,958,000 jobs per year).

The unemployment rate dropped to only 5.49%.

Deficits averaged only about $167 Billion per year, vs almost $1,300 Billion per year for Obama.

The United States was widely respected throughout the World, and his policies were credited with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Would you like to see a comparison with Obama? It's not very pretty.

There is no need to compare. And to be fair, Reagan had a (deserved) 2 terms. We'll see about the current Pres.

One of the things Reagan did was, by the way, wrangle Congress into having simplified tax brackets. Of course, it was all undone by Congress since then (and under Presidents from both parties, so you are welcome fanbois). But it took thinking members of Congress and a President who engaged them, to get it that way, and it was awesome.

Do you think the current Congress would ever step up to the plate? I think not. Not even if Reagan was still President. Sadly because both parties have entrenched themselves in selfishness.

See Time Magazine June 20, 2011: Don't Hold Your Breath:

Nobel laureate Michael Spence, author of The Next Convergence, has looked at which American companies created jobs at home from 1990 to 2008, a period of extreme globalization. The results are startling. The companies that did business in global markets, including manufacturers, banks, exporters, energy firms and financial services, contributed almost nothing to overall American job growth. The firms that did contribute were those operating mostly in the U.S. market, immune to global competition — health care companies, government agencies, retailers and hotels. Sadly, jobs in these sectors are lower paid and lower skilled than those that were outsourced. "When I first looked at the data, I was kind of stunned," says Spence, who now advocates a German-style industrial policy to keep jobs in some high-value sectors at home. Clearly, it's a myth that businesses are simply waiting for more economic and regulatory "certainty" to invest back home.

To the people that keep saying 46% don't pay any federal tax at all . . . That is because these people don't earn enough money to pay taxes. If a person earns less than the threshold for federal taxes, if they have to pay federal taxes they would end up on welfare because they couldn't afford to live so the government would end up paying anyway. This way these working poor are self sufficient and the government has a little less. BTW these people pay federal taxes but get them back; kind of like a loan to the fed, just like the people that claim zero and then file correctly to get that money back.

And to the people espousing how great Reagan was. He raised taxes 7 out of 8 years in office and increased the national debt by 189%.

I also find it interesting that people talk about the spending of the dems and not the spending of the republicans. For years democrats were called the tax and spend politician---tax to cover spending . . . but the republicans spend just as much but never cover the costs, in fact they lower revenues and spend. How can that work?

GW Bush is the only leader in the history of this planet to cut taxes while simultaneously going to war.

Agree with you, Tom. Obama said ti best - "If not now, when?"

When families, companies, or countries are having financial difficulties; the ones that recover fastest always do two things: 1) cut expenses 2) find additional revenue. Anyone or any organization truly in financial trouble would find a way to cut spending and increase revenue ... not make arguments about why one is unnecessary. I guess the GOP in it's infinite wisdom has determined that things are not really that bad; unless it's time for a speech. We're either in real trouble or we're not; no revenue improvements tells me we're not.

Obama said he was going to change things he had 2 1/2 years to do so, and he did...For the worst. It was a good thing the Republicans was sitting in the back of that bus when it went off the cliff because they were saved, but if they raise the debt ceiling with tax increases they may as well sit on Obama's lap because next election they will go too. The truth is that the government has enough money coming in monthly to pay the debt, SS, and military. Obama has the checkbook people he decides who will get paid if the ceiling isn't raised he has already decided to pay the EPA, FCC, DHS and to heck with the elderly, and military personnel. HE made that decision.

Every sane economist will tell you do not raisetaxes during a recession! JOHN BOEHNER: '' The American people are screaming at the top of their lungs to Washington, 'Stop! Stop the spending, stop the job-killing policies.' And yet, Democrats in Washington refuse to listen to the American people. '' democrat party PLEASE LISTEN!

Because the republicans believe that 2.16 Trillion per year is enough revenue. Taxing those making over 250K isn't shared sacrifice, it's class warfare. How about a federal sales tax on out of state internet sales. Everyone practicing tax avoidance would now have to pay. A true shared sacrafice.

tunanut - How about fair taxing policies utilizing a flat tax structure and eliminating Earned Family Income Credits, so everybody is taxed equally?

Yes, Obama said he was going to change the way Washington works and in reply every crazy racist redneck with a gun came out of the woodwork and vowed to stop him any way they could..........The president can't do it alone, those who support him have to let him know we have his back....

Warren Buffett said we are indeed having class warfare in this country and the rich are winning.........

I remember the deal that the Dems made in the 80's with Reagan. $3 in spending reductions for every $1 tax increase. The dems had no problem raising the taxes, but never, ever provided the spending reductions. The vast majority of Obama's spending reductions are in the out years.. after he leaves office. The tax increases take effect immediately. Sound like deja vu?

The so-called rich already pay 70% of the taxes collected while the bottom 50% pay nothing, and to make matters worse they not only pay nothing they get more back at the end of the year than they paid in. Okay let's do away with loopholes but also on the bottom 50% like the child credit. Government wants people to stop having kids let's give them a reason not to have the kids. Reverse class warfare, or welfare.

None of my friends are talking debt ceiling and deficit. We and others are out buying from yard sales and discounts stores and taking advantage of the groupon discounts. So for many Americans, who go to work everyday, this is a non-issue and a political food fight.

But it's ironic that the debt ceiling was raised 7 times under Pres. Bush, and now the Republicans won't let it be raised under Obama? Coincidence? I say the Dems & Obama should stick to their guns.

Sally,

O for Gods sake can you give the "raised 7 times" crap a break? That is so juvenile! It's like a 5th grader saying "but Bobby did it too!". What was on the table in the "grand deal" was tax reform and reduction in entitlement spending to the tune of 4 $Trillion. Not what I was looking for but a really good start. But then HERE COMES Nancy P into the mix and she kills the deal. I guess she wants a bill we need to pass first to see what's in it!

Cut, Cap and Balance! NOW!

Big Paul, I'm good with a flat tax, no loopholes or deductions. Everyone pays. Currently only half of us pay, the other half takes. Kinda like the chicken and fox discussing what's for dinner.

Sally, that's a great idea. <sarcasim/>

O for Gods sake can you give the "raised 7 times" crap a break?

What's the matter Astonished? Don't like to be reminded of the double-standards your Republican messiahs have? Don't like being reminded of the kind of hypocrites they are? Get used to it - the fact remains that Republican's DID raise the debt ceiling countless times for Bush, but now they're crying foul when they're asked to do it for Obama.

peace lover,

those same sane economists will also tell that cutting spending significantly during a recession is also a bad idea

Kathryn Sullivan

... and in reply every crazy racist redneck with a gun came out of the woodwork and vowed to stop him any way they could

So now disagreeing with a policy is racist??? But I get it ... if you own a gun and you're a "red neck" (defined as anyone who doesn't agree with you), then you must also be a racist! Very logical Kathrine ... GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

it's real easy to see if you want to.

Bush raised the ceiling 14 times with no problem. Dick said deficits don't matter !! No one was talking about the debt/deficits.

Democrat comes to office, republicans start screaming about the debt, republicans won't raise the debt ceiling and filibuster everything they can !!!

Where are the jobs Mr Bohner ?????

Banker, every one of your "facts" are wrong...

banker boy,

Yes Barrack, Nancy and Harry ... where ARE those jobs?

@ Astonished-655682

Why don't all of you closet fiscal conservatives give it a break. Where was all of your outrage 10 years ago? No, you all don't want to hear that today do ya!

Every last individual who gets on this and other blogs and talks about the amount of deficit we have, the amount of debt that exists, and/or the budget or lack thereof act like these are things that did not exist or where not important prior to January 2009. I see numerous posters coming on here saying, the President has had 2-1/2 years to change things where is the change he promised? And in the very next sentence they go on to extol the need to implement draconian style cuts to the very programs that serve them. Not a one of them admits to the obstructionism and down right reversal of positions that the Republican members of Congress have taken since January 2009.

Cut, Cap, Balance Now? How come it has to happen now? How come it didn't happen 10 years ago when the Republicans were in the White House and controlled Congress? Why is it that Republicans are only concerned about budgets, debt and deficits when Democrats hold the majority?

You want cuts? Cut the tax breaks to corporations who's effective tax rate (the one they actually pay not the one they fall into based upon their revenue) is lower than the rate paid by the median income in America. You want cuts? Cut subsidies to corporations period. Why should a corporation be subsidized anyway in a Capitalistic Economy? Want cuts? Cut defense spending in all the areas except active duty compensation. (And I'm a veteran and my father currently gets a retirement check)

You want Caps? Cap CEO salaries at a maximum of 150% above the median income in America. Cap the pay of athletes, Hollywood stars, mega million and billionaires.

You want Balance? Funny how those in favor of balance always want to begin with the imbalance that exists today. Funny how they choose to ignore the vast shift in wealth from the middle to upper class that has taken place over the past 20 years. No, they choose to act like things are equal today and those who have less today should accept less tomorrow so that those who already have more today can get even more tomorrow!

For those of you who are in support of the Republican Pledge of NO TAX INCREASE; for those of you who staunchly believe that TAX CUTS CREATE JOBS; for those of you who mistakenly state that 50% of Americans don't pay Income Tax, keep on believing there is a TOOTH FAIRY, SANTA CLAUS is REAL, and THERE IS A POT OF GOLD AT THE END OF THE RAINBOW. (you get my drift!)

Suffice it to say, you may personally think that things are bad now, but if America fails to raise the debt limit what you've experienced since 2008 will be nothing compared to what will come to fruition. If you think that failing to pay for what we have already bought is a RESPONSIBLE course of action then you can never tell another homeowner, credit card holder, student loan recipient, or any other borrower that they need to pay their outstanding bills. It really is that simple.

Either you believe in the FULL FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE UNITED STATES as well as being PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING YOUR DEBTS or you don't. There is no GREY AREA, no middle ground, no let's "MAKE INTEREST ONLY PAYMENT" B.S. or anything else.

If you are a business owner I recommend that you call your Republican Congressman\Congresswoman and Senatorial representatives and implore them to make a deal immediately. Especially if you have employees and invest in 401k's. Especially if you have money in Treasury instruments, stocks and bonds, or investments period. Especially if you rely on a Line of Credit in order to maintain working capital. All of these things will be negatively effected if there is a default on August 2nd.

And just because you think a default is the ideologically correct thing to do in order to reduce government spending doesn't mean it's the correct thing to do for America and Americans. Just like sticking your head in the sand to avoid facing reality doesn't mean that reality no longer exists.

Elected Republican Congress and Senatorial representatives need to stop with the partisan ideology. You just can't keep cutting taxes on business/corporations/wealthy, claim that they create jobs (if that were true then unemployment should be way below 9.2% because taxes are at their lowest level since the Great Depression) and then say we have a spending problem because you have decreased revenues. You can't expect Democrats to make cuts in entitlement programs while you say that any revenue increase must be offset by a tax cut (Any child could see that that type of transaction is a zero sum gain).

If it's Debt Limit Default the Republicans are looking for, they just might get it. And if they think that just because 98% of their constituents agree with their stance it doesn't make it right for the rest of Americans. Here's why; if Republicans make up 40% of the voting people in America then the 98% that they would be representing actually comes out to less than 40% of the voting electorate. Why should a minority of the voting public get to set policy for the rest of America? Is that truly Democracy?

Republicans say they believe in American exceptional ism. Let's see them also believe in America keeping it's word with respect to paying it's debts.

Nice fillibuster Sayit ...

... so what you're saying is ... keep on spending and borrowing. When do you think you might finally think you're wrong? When the dollar is worth nothing? When unemployment is 15%? When we have a double dip recession (incidently like in 1937)?

Because you don't raise the debt limit, it does not translate to a default. There's still income to pay the debt (incidently that's 40% of every dollar we borrow now). It does me we'll finally address our spending.

Tax increases ... so if 1% of the population now pays 37% of the taxes now, how much do you want? 70%? 80%? all of it? What's the point where enterprise ISN'T rewarded? Don't use the "in the 50's it was 90%" either because the ability to deduct was MUCH, MUCH higher then. Most payed zero taxes then ... but at least you "felt" better.

Sorry ... CUT, CAP, and Balance NOW!

Why don't you answer the question Astonished? Where was your outrage 10 years ago when Bush was spending like a drunk at the bar on two wars? ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!

Evilmonkey, So what your saying is that because Bush started us down this path basically toward a financial cliff, that we are just supposed to ignore the cliff and let Obama drive us over it because that would be fair!!!!!

So because a Republican got first crack, we now have to let a democrat finish us off?

Let me ask you this then, where were you democrats to put the brakes on, presidents do not make budgets they just sign them so where were they to put the brakes on Bush? Did they do their job in your opinion?

So what your saying is that because Bush started us down this path basically toward a financial cliff, that we are just supposed to ignore the cliff and let Obama drive us over it because that would be fair

That's not what I'm saying at all, don't put words in my mouth. I'm merely calling out the Republican's on their hypocrisy - they had no problem spending and raising the debt limit for 8 years of Bush's presidency, but now all of a sudden Obama is the anti-Christ for asking for an increase in the debt limit? Guess what, we wouldn't need this increase if Bush hadn't cut taxes for the wealthy and started two wars!

where were you democrats to put the brakes on, presidents do not make budgets they just sign them so where were they to put the brakes on Bush?

You'll notice a fair amount of those Democrat's are no longer in office.

@ Evilmonkey, First of all you need to get your facts straight. Bush did not START any wars and (Remember 9/11?). Second your democrats who were in office voted to allow Bush to stay in those wars.

Third the cost for all the wars put together over the past 11 years does not even equal the deficit for this year alone. Wars=1.2 Trillion, Deficit 2011=1.4. Maybe you dont remember that little thing called the HOUSING BUBBLE that busted BIG TIME which was set in motion by your favorite Clinton. Kept from being investigated by another one of your favorites BARNEY FRANK.

Fourth we can sit here and discuss all day what mistakes both sides have made in the past but how in the hell does that help us in any way today? The only thing that will help us is to discuss what we can do TOGETHER to move forward by LEARNING from the mistakes BOTH sides have made in the past not by DEMONIZING each other for making the mistakes.

@David - IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11!!!! Get your facts straight. We went in there to stop Saddam from building weapons of mass destruction based on forged documents that said he was trying to get Uranium from Africa. Remember the 'slam dunk'? But yes, once we had already committed billions of borrowed Chinese $$$ to the war, the spineless Democrats voted to stay. But so what you are saying is that if not for the wars, the deficit would only be .2 trillion, the lowest it has been, adjusted for inflation, since Reagan began ballooning the deficit. But hey, if 1.2 trillion in deficit does not matter, I guess you are ok with the stimulus. So, to get this straight, the wars STARTED by W 10 years ago have almost nothing to do with the current crisis, but housing policies started by Clinton 20 years ago do? At least be consistent please.

Me ...

Guess you need to talk to Princess Nancy P about that!

Democrat position:

Tax first ... reduce spending second ... (of course we trust they ever will reduce spending)

Republican position:

reduce spending first ... tax when economy turns around (guess you missed that part MSNBC?).

... But Nancy is so good a screwing things up!

republican position ==== make sure Obama is a one term president at ANY COST, even if it means dragging the American economy into a DEPRESSION...

the end

Every sane economist will tell you do not raisetaxes during a recession! JOHN BOEHNER: '' The American people are screaming at the top of their lungs to Washington, 'Stop! Stop the spending, stop the job-killing policies.' And yet, Democrats in Washington refuse to listen to the American people. '' democrat party PLEASE LISTEN!

i think we need to talk to boener and McConnell

i dont recall nancy pelosi walking out on anything and i dont really understand your reference to her!

ya cant solve the problem with just reduced spending and ya cant get there with just revenue increases....it has to be done together

@ PeaceLover: Actually, you're wrong. Every economist who isn't in someone's pocket has stated that in order to reign in America's debt, we need to cut spending and increase revenue. Plain and simple. It's a group effort, so no tax increases should be targeted at any specific group (ergo, tax increase across the board). Once we reign in the debt, then we can examine reducing taxes again.

At this point, it doesn't really matter whose fault it is, now does it? Playing the blame game does nothing but take time and focus away from the actual problem we're presented with now.

Me - Nancy had control of the House, Reed had Control of the Senate, President Obama had the Veto power, for two years, they managed to pass a nightmare called Obamacare, but no budget, WHY?

It is time for America to demand a balanced budget amendment. With the current crop of Governemtn Officials, who think they have an open check book it is as President Obama states, if not now when?

banker boy

make sure Obama is a one term president at ANY COST, even if it means dragging the American economy into a DEPRESSION...

Here's a totally wacked statement. First ... a bug DUH here banker boy ... do you think they'd campaign for him??? Second, so first it was all Bushes fault then we (the voters) gave the Dems a chance ... they spent the farm and it isn't working. In fact it's getting worse and ... (and as always) it's someone else's fault!

Buddy, we may actually be in a depression (a recession that lasts two or more years ... we might be there!). Your absolute inability to deal with entitlement reform (and yes, tax reform too) is an indication of a lack of leadership from the extreme left of your party. The Democrat senate voted 100-0 against the President's budget and has yet to even SUGGEST a bill for a floor vote. The party of no ideas pointing in every direction except themselves! It's YOUR ECONOMY! YOU OWN IT and it's performance is YOUR FAULT because of YOUR POLICIES!

me

i dont recall nancy pelosi walking out on anything and i dont really understand your reference to her!

When Nancy ran the House she never even invited Repubs to the table. You need to be at the table to walk out. Just a small point!

Besides the fact when the democrats had total control and tried to raise taxes they couldn't get enough votes to pass them. So that should tell you this is a dog and pony show for them. They are glad the Republicans are getting hit for something they didn't have the balls to do.

Who is minding the store as the politicians (aka: public servants) do their tap dance over the debt ceiling; all the makings of good ole American theater...(and) to make matters worse as they're doing that, the 'Big 4' banks comprised of 'bankstas' are getting away with only a slap on the wrist for bungling TARP $$$ so badly they're only going to be fined $30 Billion a paltry 7% of what they STOLE from Americans and more debt that we owe to China!

Pretty slick, if I say so, as the Fed got so stuck in the paper mill and lack the smarts and inclination to do decent fact-finding, they've thrown up their hands and proclaimed, 'we give.' And, so they have...they're turned the screws ever so carefully to the American people, while serving up the 'bankstas' Dom Perignon and only the finest Beluga caviar.

So, now as the bankstas are playing it like John Dillinger, 1930's gangsta-style, but at least he was 'real' in his thug-like criminality! Where is the Dept. of Justice in all this? And, where oh where is Dillinger when you really need him? ; - )

Republican-Corporatists need to be confronted and stay on the topic :

• The Bush Tax cut have been in place, unaltered, for a decade. Where are the US jobs ?

The Republican-Corporatists can no longer say tax cut create jobs. They spent all the money chasing down a handful of 'terrorists' in the wrong country, while Bin Laden was living comfortably in Pakistan. Now, they want fiscal responsibility but, under what moral authority ?

• Today Obama is communist. If he, for some reason he invokes the 14th Amendament to solve this problem, You will watch them shout at him: Obama is a monarchist.

Those that are GUILTY OF MAKING THIS COUNTRY A MESS, YELL THE LOUDEST. How many times did conservatives raise the ceiling under Junior ?___________________seven.

• STOPPING TAX BREAKS IS NOT RAISING TAXES.

Bush no long is in charge. Obama came into power put on the big Superman suit and said he would have this fixed within the first 2 years of being in office. He had total control of the Congress and Senate that first two years and didn't even bother to put forth a budget and couldn't get any tax increases pass because the smarter Democrats know that raising taxes isn't popular with anyone.

Let's see if I understand the GOP/TP position.

"What's mine is mine, what's yours is negotiable."

Oh, Ok, now I get it. So the rich get richer and get to keep everything they have while the rest of us foot the bill. I got it.

Obama/Biden 2012

ABOLISH the FEDERAL RESERVE and you will see what happens at the TOP! The Nay sayers will be the bought-out candidates..which means MOST of the democrats and republicans! Obama for sure is top sell out! He was never qualified to be president in the first place!

Money is the root of all our discord! It is controlled by PRIVATE Secret Bankers, NOT us and we have NO control over them at all!! Why would we do such a thing? Woodrow Wilson (democrat) paid back the bankers who paid for his election in 1913 by enacting the FEDERAL RESERVE to disguise it as though it was FEDERALLY controlled! THE BIGGGGGGEESSSTTT FRAUD in HISTORY of this country..The ONLY President that tried to STOP this EVIL group was John F. Kennedy (democrat)! and he was assassinated soon after...and Lyndon B. Johnson's first act in presidency was to repeal Kennedy's attempt to abolish the FED!

Go to YOUTUBE and look up The American DREAM by Provocateur to get an understanding of the EVILS of the FED! That link won't show here!

NEWS MEDIA received 1.6 BILLION from BUSH as payoffs to tell you A STORY..This junk is just Obama trying to look like the good guy crap again!! Obama is paying off Media too..but TRILLIONS are missing from the FED..and no one knows where it went! SEcret deals are being made to destroy the last SUPER POWER!! Necessary for the NEW WORLD ORDER!!

See it for what it is...DISTRACTION!! Other countries will invade our country to take the spoils! Some may be taken as slaves..most killed! Patriot ACT is vial to human conduct but BOTH PARTIES voted for it!! WE don't own anything! We were the COLLATERAL to the LOANS!! dah!!!

It doesn't work that way. Lowering taxes does not create jobs. Raising taxes creates jobs. Salaries are tax-deductible for employers. When you raise taxes, you are giving companies an incentive to save taxes by hiring more people. Lower taxes, and the savings go away.

Look at history. This is what's happening. Good years after higher taxes, and bad years follow lower taxes.

Tyler

Why was Post #1 collapsed? There was no violation of the code.

News flash the Democrats has had control of the congress since 2006. News flash Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling when he was in the Senate calling it irresponsibly. News flash Bush is gone.

Byron

You missed something in your theory. In order for jobs to be created to generate the deductions for employers, there must be a demand for additional product or at least a potential demand. When taxes are raised, more money per week comes from the pockets of the consumer to feed the government and less is available to fuel the economy. i.e. less money to create new demands for goods which means no reason to hire additional employees. No one is talking about lowering taxes at the moment but to raise them without first securing substantial spending cuts doesn't do anyone any good.

Here is how the Deal SHOULD BE!

It is not hard.. X = income Y = spending X-Y should be >0

1st ---- Pass a balanced budget amendment. WITH a huge set of teeth to make going around it impossible.

2nd ----CUT THE HELL out of our spending so we are not running a trillion + deficit every year ( projected by Obama to be 1+ trillion for the next 10 years )

3rd ---- Once the budget is balanced ( IE you are not spending more then you are taking in and the economy is running again ) raise taxes to lower the debt.

Only under an emergency situation should we EVER be spending more money then we bring in.

The reason this will not happen.. Congress is too scared of not getting re-elected.

@ Donna: News Flash, crappy legislation takes time to undo. Hence the reason why the entirety of this issue can't be laid at just one President's feet. It's been encouraged and added to by the last 4 Presidents at least.

People stop beleiving that no budget has been passed in two years. the federal government does not work that way. Every year a budget is passed, it just doesn't always get passed by the beginning of the Fiscal year. If no budget is passed government shuts down, the military shuts down. the last budget got passsed with an extension of the bush tax cuts, so you idiots who believe that no budget has been passed in two years are spoon fed your information because you certainly can form an opinion of your own even if it is staring you in the face. STOP LISTENING TO FOX NEWS!!!!

News flash! The only reason we are in this mess is because republicans ran us so far in to debt the economy collapsed. News flash! God and the GOP wont help you.News flash the american people need to tell the government to get the hell out and call for new elections across the board. Oh and new flash fat chance in hell that will ever happen because all we do is complain.

One more time, Mr. Obama

If you lay your greedy fingers on Social Security, Disability, Medicare and Medicaid

YOU WILL BE A ONE TERM PRESIDENT and your only job after the Presidency will be flipping Burgers at McDonalds.....

By the way Grand Obstructionist Party, Party of the No, The Republican't Party, SAME GOES FOR YOU.... If you cut Social Security, Disability, Medicare and Medicaid you too will join Obama working at McDonalds... In other words we will vote you OUT OF OFFICE too you stupid Republican'ts!!!!!

Astonished-655682 - Let me see if I get this straight; cut hundreds of thousands of middle-class government jobs during a period where consumers aren't spending to begin with? Reduce demand to boost the economy? You people amaze me!

Here is a way to get people back to work (Responding to spineless coward Obama who is blabbing on the television right now)

1. Increase tariffs on all goods made outside the USA to 33%. Declare anything made outside the 50 states, the territories and Commonwealth as foreign made even if its made by a USA Company who's HQ is inside the USA.

2. Tax any business 500% that sends jobs overseas or that sent jobs overseas

3. Offer massive tax breaks for keeping businesses inside the USA (This includes factories etc) and an even more massive tax break for keeping jobs in the USA... And wow, if you have a business overseas and shut it down and bring it back to the USA you get yet another massive Tax break on top of all that too...

4. With-draw from the World Trade Organisation Withdraw from the International Monetary Fund With-draw from the World Bank.

5. Arrest the head of the Federal Reserve issue arrest warrents for members of the World Bank that has caused so much problems for Greece Ireland, Israel and the USA

6. Dissolve the Federal Reserve

7. it Might help if we could find a way to resserect or regenerate (Think Doctor Who here) Andrew Jackson so he can deal with the Federal Reserve.

I believe doing 6 of 7 of these will bring all the jobs back (You guess which one is ment as a joke :) )

Good day

The sad truth is we've been living way beyond our means for far too long. It's time to get our fiscal house in order, and it's not going to be easy or pain free. All of us are going to have to sacrifice.

As to solutions, if we can agree to hundreds of billions/year in real spending cuts, then I'm fine with tax increase discussions - as long as the increases are across the board (i.e.; go back to the Clinton rates for everyone).

Cutting spending is NOT going to reduce the debt - plain and simple.

Washington needs to get some balls (both sides of the aisle) here is what needs to be done:

1. Pass a law - government can only spend 99% of revenue taken in. The 1% goes to treasury for emergencies and if used - must be repaid back dollar for dollar.

2. All current spending is to be reduced by 10% - some programs can be cut immediately, while others are cut 10% over two - three year period. Again - all programs (Social Security, Medicare, Defense, Farm, etc.)

3. The tax rates go back to where they were in 1990. The increase in revenue only goes to paying off the national debt. When the National Debt is paid off then come up with new and fair tax rates.

4. Scrap the current tax code, get rid of the loop holes, get ride of the deductions, get rid of the "hiding income". If you do business in the US - then you are taxed on that profit. And you can not bid on Government contracts- unless your headquarters are in the US.

Magnum - I would add - issue arrest warrants for every corporation and broker that caused the 2008 crash and received a government bailout.

Obama is talking out of both sides of his mouth again. If they truly wanted a balanced budget they would have passed one two years ago, but it just wasn't that important to them. He says lets go, well Obama just what is "your"plan. You have passed the buck long enough, go ahead and use your executive power and raise the debt ceiling, see what happens in the 2012 elections. You are good at talk but you fail to walk the walk. You had a debt commission that told you what should be done but you wanted to do things your way so this is your baby now lets see how smart you really are and just how much you really know. We voted you in now fix it like you said while campaigning. Oh I forgot "you can say a lot while campaigning that you don't really mean"!!!!!!

I look at it like I run my home finances. If I do not have enough money I cut some of the spending first and then try to find another job to pick up the rest of the money I need. If I were to run my home like these people run the government I would be kicked out of my house and begging for food. You can not spend more that what you take in.

With the fact that the congress raised the debt ceiling 7 times during Bush's 8 years in office was the wrong thing to do but Bush did not come into office and spend almost a trillion dollars and call it a stimulus package that was suppose to keep unemployment less than 8% which it is 9.2% now. Congress under democrats control was able to pass obama care but could not address the debt ceiling while they had total control of the government. What were their priorities?

Republicans come in and have to deal with it. To me the democrats were afraid to deal with the issues that needed to be dealt with and wanted to make the US their little social experiment that has failed many times in the past Look at the former Soviet Union and the Eastern block countries.

Please use spell check it is difficult to understand sometimes with the misspelling

Obama is talking out of both sides of his mouth again. If they truly wanted a balanced budget they would have passed one two years ago, but it just wasn't that important to them.

And up to this year it was important to the Republicans? What about 2 wars and a tax cut all funded on borrowed money? It would seem Republicans have a very short, selective memory.

If I were Bohner, I would give Obama exactly what he wants. The problem with the Republican strategy is that they keep getting cornered.

I say let's support the Democrats 100%. Disagree, but support.

Let them have all the tax increases that they want, do not insist on any real spending decreases, and in 2012, as the economy continues to tank due to the democrat idiocy, there will be an even bigger win for conservatives.

Fact is democrats have supported and paid for Iraq and Afghanistan every year, funding these wars. The fact is Obama started a 3rd and is getting ready to start a 4th and 5th war with Pakistan and Iran. The fact is Democrats spend and blame.

Because this nibbling at the edges hasn't worked and won't work.

Magnum Serpentine

One more time, Mr. Obama

If you lay your greedy fingers on Social Security, Disability, Medicare and Medicaid

Um....you do know that those programs are giving out a LOT more than they are taking in and are NOT solvent, right? They aren't working, plain and simple. They need to be drastically revamped.

Paul F

If I were Bohner, I would give Obama exactly what he wants. The problem with the Republican strategy is that they keep getting cornered.

I say let's support the Democrats 100%. Disagree, but support.

Let them have all the tax increases that they want, do not insist on any real spending decreases, and in 2012, as the economy continues to tank due to the democrat idiocy, there will be an even bigger win for conservatives.

Because this nibbling at the edges hasn't worked and won't work.

As pathetic as it is, they would STILL blame Bush.

mine718-3072802

News flash! The only reason we are in this mess is because republicans ran us so far in to debt the economy collapsed.

Newsflash! The Democrats had control of BOTH houses from 2006-2010 with supermajorities and the White House from 2008-2010. The economic collapse happened in 08-09. Blaming Republicans is as silly as it gets.

Democrats have no balls!

If I was a Democrat or better yet a ""Democrat Leader I would aim for a hostile takeover of the Republican party.

I would write a bill the ends all and any redistribution of funds. Whether corporate subsidies, welfare, health ALL! Then I would sit back and watch the republicans become democrats.

And if not!

The one fact of history is through the ashes of failed civilizations comes the growth of humanity.

Ol_Doc,

Let me see if I get this straight; cut hundreds of thousands of middle-class government jobs during a period where consumers aren't spending to begin with?

Simple answer, YES! Government does not create jobs. Government creates the basis for job growth. And while you're throwing that "hundreds of thousand" number around ... how about the fact that the Obama Administrations has grown the size of the government payroll by 25% since being in office. How about we just go back to what it was 2 years ago? I'll give you a choice, too. Either less head count or less payroll dollars. Attrition, furlough, layoffs ... Figure it out, you've grown both sides!

4 Letters Tell All

Put four 'Chosen' letters together and you spell the specific entity responsible for the moral and economic bankruptcy America is currently suffering through. Cowardly, corrupt, conniving, and committed, this powerfully cohesive force continues to suck the financial blood from the American Public while maintaining their collective foot on our life-breathe constrained throats. Yet not one fellow American dares speak out against those these 4 letters name, in favor of liberty and justice for all.

Hi skip,

I don't think that is the GOP/TP plan at all. I don't know I represent the average conservative voice in the USA, but I think that what is needed to run a constitutionally limited government is what we need from the people. Your class warfare paradigm is hurting us, not helping us. But I don't say this because I favor the rich over the poor, or the strong over the weak, I say it because I care more about liberty than equality of outcome.

I'd prefer our government not look at our GDP as a fixed-sized pie to be divvied up by our overlords in DC, but rather look at ways to grow the economy. On this Obama is a miserable failure--he is as economically illiterate as any president we've ever had. Let's open up our lands for mining and drilling and grazing and timbering. Let's shift the responsibility for insurance to the individual, not the government or even an employer. Let's limit the government to only those activities you can justify as being authorized by the constitution. And let's, for pete's sake, alter the tax code so that more people pay even if they pay a lower rate.

It's the confluence of all of these issues that has us in a pinch, not the fantasy of some determined plan by conservatives to hose the poor. Here's why. Would you use more, or less, medical care if you were responsible for more of the cost directly? You are already responsible indirectly. I'd argue the decoupling of use from cost causes users to act less rationally.

Would you vote for more, or less, government if you were faced with paying more of the direct cost for it? You already pay indirectly. I'd argue that decoupling the cost of government from your use of it causes you to want more given it "appears" to be a good deal for you. The fact it isn't doesn't matter because you don't count lower wages, or lower benefits, or higher prices, as your costs for government. Yet they are.

Would employment go up, or down, if we didn't have restrictions, and in some cases outright bans, on resource exploitation? Would your costs for those products that come from those resources go up, or down? You don't have to be an economist to understand that more supply will cause prices to fall (all other things equal) and that more employees are required to produce them. So we'd have more wages, lower prices, more government revenue. And yet our president would prefer to RESTRICT development.

So blame republicans if you want--they should be blamed for much, though nothing you imply--but it seems to me that the real problem isn't the GOP, it isn't even Obama, it is you, and people like you. People who think they can get something for nothing, and who are unhappy when it doesn't work out that way.

I wonder who we should listen to on the debt?

Democrats - No budget for two years. Sorry, Repubs didn't block it; Dems didn't even try to write one. The only Dem that came close to writing one was Obama and it was shot down by his own party.

Republicans - Budget for 2012 written and ready for debate in April.

Difficult decision? Don't think so!

Banker boy,

republican position ==== make sure Obama is a one term president at ANY COST, even if it means dragging the American economy into a DEPRESSION...

The only reason we arent in a Depression, is because economists, and BANKRES, refuse to ADMIT it because it would hurt those massive pay bonus's you get,,,,,,boy.

If you read the story the key is this statment "Aug. 2 deadline looms to raise the debt limit, the amount of money the U.S. government is allowed to borrow". Now I ask all of you that have posted is'nt Obama's borrowing the reason we are in this mess today? I can think of $875 billion reasons, I can think of Obama care as a reason, bail out of the auto co. the give away to unions, I can think of cost to be in the middle east as a reason. I say let the debt limit stay were it is,until we get a few trillion paid back that should put the breaks on Obama and his spending.

So let's see, my credit card is maxed out again; I can just raise the credit limit and continue to spend until I max it out again. I don't have to worry about paying down the amount I have spent, just pay the interest on the debt. The interest payments are more than I can afford now, but I can always get my rich uncle to give me some of his money. He doesn't need all of that money why wouldn't he give me some of it to buy more things. The last time I wanted some of his money, he wanted me to sell one of my 120 inch plasmas. GEEEZZZZZ what a greedy SOB!

drew@

Not Funding Seniors And Stopping YOUR social security / medicare Checks (That You paid Taxes Into and Now the Republicans want to tell you are now "Entitlements"

Drew this is just one of several deliberate inaccurate statements you have made in your post, there is no reduction or halt in payment of social security / medicare Checks to seniors, nor are any planned.

Yes, the Republidiots think they can reduce the deficit on the backs of the middle class and elderly without touching the fat cats. They think we will have forgotten by the next election. WE WILL NOT FORGET and they will pay dearly if they hang on for no new taxes on the rich. I have never voted a "stright ticket" in my life, but I will definitely vote a straight Dem ticket in the next election if they pull that cr@p.

I've got news for all of you...

Republicans and Democrats BOTH are self-righteous morons. The answers to the country's problems do not lie with either extreme idiology but lie somewhere in the middle.

When has following one extreme ever been beneficial? With food, overeating leads to obesity, no eating leads to anorexia.... both extremes lead to an early demise.

So take your heads out of your rears and stop blaming one side or another. Both policital parties are to blame equally.

What the Republicans are doing is 100% immoral. They didn't blink an eye raising the debt ceiling 9 times for Bush the destroyer.

This nation needs to punish these creeps. They all have selfish interests that are benefiting them financially some personally such as Cantor and Ryan in their personal business dealings and are playing games with our economy at the expense of the middle class. Are we going to continue to put up with this????

I say let's support the Democrats 100%. Disagree, but support.

Let them have all the tax increases that they want, do not insist on any real spending decreases, and in 2012, as the economy continues to tank due to the democrat idiocy, there will be an even bigger win for conservatives.

The problem with doing this.. Is the Republicans are on record of supporting the tax increases and the democrat agenda. With the republicans owning the house, it will not be hard due to the voting records, to pin everything on the Republicans necks. We all know that political memories with Voters are very short. It will be a lose lose proposition.

Hell, look at Reagan and the amnesty bill that he signed. VERY few people seem to remember that after the bill was signed, it was promised that Immigration reform was going to happen to sure up the borders. THAT never happened. SO now you have people putting that bill around his neck, when it was only part of the deal. See above for confirmation.

IF there is one red cent of deficit left after this debt ceiling is raised, then everything has been a failure. We can tackle the DEBT later, right now they should be concerned about the DEFECT. If we do not run a DEFECT we do not add to the debt.

Just what we needed another Obama lover, Let me ask you something BIN from NH must belong to a union to talk like he does, but anyway let say they move the limit up 3 trillion more, how fast do you think Obama could spend that 3 trillion, who would benefit from that spending companies like GM, AARP, UAW, SEIU, AFL-CIO, Wal-Mart, who else would he spend 3 trillion on Bin. the sad thing is bin no one person would get his/her job back not one dime would be to create jobs unless your a union worker or you work for GE. the limit should stay were it is the rich should keep their money so someday they will start to create jobs and have the money to do so. Bin your a fool!!!!

republican position ==== make sure Obama is a one term president at ANY COST, even if it means dragging the American economy into a DEPRESSION...

Uh, we're pretty much there already. Mr Obama and his democrat majorities had two years to start turning things around and they've only gotten worse. The problem with Mr O's proposals is they always START with more taxes and spending with the promise of cuts and savings later (which, of course, never quite materialize).

We need more revenue, but we need to get it through having more taxpayers, not through increasing the taxes on the less than 50% who already pay 100% of the collected taxes. Focus on making the private sector healthy, then they will employ people, and those people will pay taxes. Do that and the whole pie will grow (not shrink).

Why does BHO always blame the Republicans? Seem Princess P and the rest of the Democrats Should equally share the blame!

the bottom 50% still pay pay-roll taxes, gasoline tax, SS, Medicare/caid, sales tax, state income tax, etc.

To say that the top half pay 100% of the taxes is blatantly false and misleading. Also raising taxes on the people who are the most effected (the bottom half) would hurt the economy more than raising the taxes on the ones already flush with cash (warren Buffet, Walton family, etc.) and would probably see no cost to the economy at all. Example, Buffet, with his $40 Billion net worth, can get along just fine on $40 million a year, as opposed to $46 million a year and hes willing to cough more up if congress makes him and his fellow billionaires do the same. (I.E. telling a billionaire that he can always put down more on his tax return as a joke, doesn't work, you need the collective whole to pool together, not just the ones feeling generous)

Your plan for balancing the budget is a recipe for disaster, your making the have-nots work with less than before and giving the benefit to people who already have more cash than they know what to do with.

Hi nwnative,

I hate to be confrontational, but did you think Mr. Obama was immoral when he voted to not raise the debt ceiling? Or are you the kind of political party hack most of us that are able to reason and think have come to despise?

I think we should not raise the debt ceiling UNLESS there are structural reforms put into place that Congress and the President cannot evade. The problem is that with every attempt in the past, like Gramm/Rudman/Hollings, or PayGo, both the congress and the president have done just that. The true immorality is that you are willing to continue to steal from your heirs so you can live beyond your means today.

If you tried to do this any other way you'd be guilty of felony larceny, but because those future Americans have no voice you can pretend you are truly a noble person. But you aren't. And sorry, but arguing that taxes must be raised on someone else to pay for your "free stuff" today would make you no more moral as well. So please don't lecture others about selfish interests--you and people like you have rationalized away your theft from others to the point you actually believe you are doing good deeds.

You are ruining my country, and I am not going to put up with this. Obama and his ilk need to go. Republicans that favor large and intrusive federal spending need to go. And people like you that vote for these thieves need to go.

@donna426

"News flash the Democrats has had control of the congress since 2006. News flash Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling when he was in the Senate calling it irresponsibly. News flash Bush is gone."

Newsflash....all this debt we've fussing about is money REPUBLICAN leadership spent raising the debt limit S E V E N times during the Bush admin for (2) tax breaks for the rich, corporate welfare (Med Part D) and 2 elective wars - with no drama whatsoever.

What's Republicans problem now? Could it be they're just low-lifes who skip out on their bills? Or is it something more sinister - they're willing to trash the GLOBAL economy - destroy millions of lives - because they think it will give them leaverage in 2012?

(Newsflash. They're dead wrong. I actually hope they give Cantor a bigger shovel. He's digging the GOP's grave, but he's not digging nearly hard or fast enough for my taste!)

Elle, as always your facts are wrong...

Drew

Instead to talk about to increase the debt ceiling, Obama should leading to the way of,not raise the debt ceiling. 75% of American do not want increase the debt ceiling, they don't want more spending with the money we don't have. But for liberals most Americans are ignorants we don't understand we need to spend more to get the economy back. Obama already increase the national debt adding trillions of dollars in order to get the economy back, but that wasn't enough he need more in order to fix the economy. Obama is doing the same think over and over looking for a different result. How do you call that, is simple right?

And you think the Dems are any different,look one post up stopnpanic knows what he's talking about. Wake up!

the bottom 50% still pay pay-roll taxes, gasoline tax, SS, Medicare/caid, sales tax, state income tax, etc.

Okay, 50% of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Is that better? BTW, the other 50% that pays 100% of the federal income taxes ALSO pay gasoline tax, fica, SS, Medicare, sales tax, etc. No matter how you cut it, about half are getting a pretty free ride from the other half.

@Duane

"Why does BHO always blame the Republicans? Seem Princess P and the rest of the Democrats Should equally share the blame!"

Because Republican ideology (representing the interests of corporate wealth) has, for the past 40 years, done nothing good for main street, but had only managed to create the biggest redistribution of wealth - from the middle-class - in history.

This fight is happening, because the middle-class has been bled bone dry, and is fighting back for the recovery of some of its wealth - wealth it needs to participate in the economic recovery, and get the country back on its feet.

But, so far, the Republicans are determined to not give a dime back...with no real idea - they're just as stupid as they are greedy - of what they're doing.

They're really scary.

All you white guys that went running into the arms of the Republican Pasrty over Civil Right......it's time to come home. Your support of their determination to turn America into a land of corporate fascism is killing us. Believe me...you won't like being a slave to your corporate overlords....you are risking killing our democratic republic.

Get with the program.....STOP SUPPORTING THE RICH.

that was supposed to read ...

"create the biggest redistribution of wealth - from the middle-class - to the uber rich - in history."

Tyler

Why was Post #1 collapsed? There was no violation of the code.

roy, I have to agree with you on that one. I may not agree with the post, but there certainly was no COH violation.

I really hate it when people that collapse posts just because they disagree, but you see both the left and the right doing the same stupid thing.

“This is part of the problem with a political process where folks are rewarded for saying irresponsible things to win election or obtain short-term political gain … .”

Says the man who won the pesidential election on empty promises... to the media he assembled to spew his rhetoric for short-term political gain.

Raising the debt ceiling and borrowing more = passing the cost to future generations. No amount of Republican bashing in yet another speach (when he himself refused to meet with Republicans when they asked) is going to change that.

Raising taxes on corporations won't hurt their pocket books in the least. Raise the cost of running a business by 10% and watch the consumers end up paying at least 10% more. When consumers can't afford as much of their goods or services, the company will just lay off more workers.

Mr Obama & congress, at some point, you've got enough $$ coming in. It's time to tighten the belt and get to work and quit spending your "hard earned money" on frivolous things (read as Vegas to the people).

Elle in the famous words of Charlie Sheen, the Republican are "WINNING".

Ya Wanna Cut the Budget and reduce the Deficit?

Ok, here's how you do it.

1. We operate over 750 military bases around the world. Shut most or all of those off-shore and close one third to one half of those in the continental US and it's protectorates and territories.

2. Stop being the world's policeman. Let the Europeans do it for awhile. Bring our troops home ALL of our troops.

3. Mothball about half of our military hardware until it's needed.

4. Implement a flat tax. EVERYBODY pays the same, rich, poor, church, corporation. NO EXCEPTIONS.

5. End corporate welfare.

6. End farm subsidies.

7. Legalize Marijuana and tax it's sale and production. This will kill the South American drug cartels, end the violence in Mexico and free our law enforcement to pursue real crime. It will free up space in our jails and prisons. It will also generate revenue.

8. Legalize Prostitution and tax it. Create health codes and regular examinations. Minimum wage, health benefits, make it an industry like everything else, tax it and regulate it. That frees up even more of our law enforcement efforts and more space in our jails.

9. Reduce the Congressional Budget. No more franking, no gold-plated healthcare, reduce the size of their staff, close the congressional gym if it can't make a profit or at least break even. No free parking. Yeah, I know it's peanuts, but let's be sure they know what it's like in the real world outside the beltway.

10. Sell Texas, Arizona, Utah and Nevada. I'm pretty sure Mexico will take Texas and Arizona. The Mormons will buy Utah and the Mob wants Nevada. OK boys, they are yours for a price. Take'em off our hands. It will generate billions, maybe even a trillion in revenue plus all the money we save sending Federal dollars to them for highways and so on.

You do all that (well, at least 1-9) and see where we stand financially. I'll bet we're looking pretty good. We might even have a surplus. THEN we'll talk about cuts to Medicare, Social Security and so on.

Get it?

Got it!

Good.

@Donna

You really need to change stations once in a while....poll after poll says Republicans will be blamed for a fiasco..lol.. I just hope the grave Cantor is digging is deep enough to bury Republicans forever....lol

@ChipD

"Elle, as always your facts are wrong..."

Well Chip, that's debatable, isn't it?

“Beware of the half truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half.” ~Author Unknown

Middle-class "neo-Republican" puppets have been living on the half-truths the Republican propaganda machine for about 40 years now (ever since Civil Rights).

Don't you people ever get tired of looking dumb?

Skip Nicholson for Congress!

Elle: You sound like you are one of the welfare babes I was referring to. Sorry if I struck a nerve but you really should put down the joint and leave the posting to us adults who understand the problem. Oh yeh, and everyone doesn't "hate" everyone. You seem to be hung up on that.

Wow, skip Nicholson....I couldn't agree more! I'd take another step, as well. You'll need to find something to do with all of those idle soldiers that are coming home from around the world. Let's take a portion of that workforce and put them on the US/Mexico border. Let's have more soldiers helping out our ICE agents with rounding up all the illegals stealing our jobs. I'm also in favor of severely penalizing companies who hire illegals.

Once the our illegal immigration problem is corrected, then institute a law stating that you cannot be on welfare longer than 2 years. And, your unemployment benefits will run dry after 99 weeks. With all the new job openings popping up in the manual labor sector, their should be ample jobs to pick and choose from....no previous experience or college degree needed!!

More Americans back to work, creating more demand for goods and services, generating more profits for businesses. The only thing is.....we HAVE to mandate somehow that these profits be shared with everyone responsible for generating them. That means, the stockholders and CEO's and executives can fight over what's left AFTER the rank-and-file workers get their well-deserved cut of the profit pie!

If not now when? Americans have been saying that months. Now Obama finally gets it. What an idiot. Let move to social security and fix it "if not now when?' last thing i want to hear in 30yrs when Id like to retire and recover maybe a fraction of what i payed into the broken system is a bunch of nimwit dems blaming repubs when their the ones who entitled it to everyone who doesnt deserve it.

Post 1 and 2 collapsed!!!! Free speech???

I saw no violations!!! Come on MSNBC do YOUR job too!!!

I've got an idea. Let's pass the bill to cut spending (for all you leftists that would be "investment) to see what's in it. Then we can "talk" about increasing taxes (for all you leftists that would be "revenue") but only to pay down the debt. Absolutely not to pay for any new spending (for all you leftists that would be "investment"). :)

@Allen

"Raising the debt ceiling and borrowing more = passing the cost to future generations. No amount of Republican bashing in yet another speach (when he himself refused to meet with Republicans when they asked) is going to change that."

You should have thought of that when the Republicans raised the debt limit seven times during the Bush Admin. Bellyaching about it NOW that a Democrat's spending to keep the economy afloat (to keep YOU afloat instead of just the rich folks the Republicans passed all those debt increases for) just doesn't make a bit of sense.

Not that anyone expects you people to have any (sense).

And, that's the shame of it....that this seems to be "rocket science" to most of you.

Weiser

The Democratics DID NOT HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY in congress from 2008-2010. And Social Security is ok. Only the republican'ts believe the lie that Social Security Etc is not ok. Social Security and Medicare Medicaid and Disability helps tens of millions. Surely you do not want to throw grandma into the street eh?

Rich,

I hate to be confrontational but you are full of crap. Just like your Republican buddies who protect the rich. I think you forgot that us working people pay into SSN and Medicare. I believe that is what they have been taking out of my paycheck every month. I haven't been given anything for free.

And by the way, it is not SSN creating the deficit. It's the Bush tax cuts and the two wars he crammed down our throats so the egotistical creep could jump around in a flack jacket and pretend mission accomplished.

There isn't a man on this earth that could fix what Bush/Cheney did in 3 years. NO body.

How about if the corporations who pay no taxes or less than the middle class jump in and participate in fixing our Bush created deficit. The debt ceiling that needs to be raised is to cover Bush's crazy spending. It is for past debts, not current debt.

Please tell me what great ideas the Republicans have come up with? You say Obama is worse than what the Republicans are trying to do? What? I don't know about you but I don't want to be a slave to the rich in this country and that's exactly where we are heading. I don't know who you are defending. It sounds like the devil.

Drew........You clearly do not understand what the debt ceiling is. This is not about what we are going to spend, it is about paying for what we already have spent. If we do not pay our ratings will crash and interest on the debt we have will go up costing many trillions of dollars , making the situation much worse.

To put is in simple terms for you, it is as if the country had a credit card and every month they kept increasing their balance. The answer is not to stop making the payments completely ( refusing to raise the debt ceiling), the answer is to spend less and earn more so that you can afford to pay down the balance instead of increasing it. We need to cut spending and increase revenue, but you do not do that by defaulting on debt you already have out there ( aka bankruptcy ) if you are responsible and know you will need to borrow in the future. Cutting spending and refusing to honor past debts are two different things, you seem to have them confused. We need to cut spending, not default on debts we built up over the last 10 years as you suggest.

@usa1967

"Elle: You sound like you are one of the welfare babes I was referring to. Sorry if I struck a nerve but you really should put down the joint and leave the posting to us adults who understand the problem. Oh yeh, and everyone doesn't "hate" everyone. You seem to be hung up on that."

You seem to have gotten terse....Sorry I exposed the painfully shallow depth of your mindset. It really does pain me to try to debate unsophisticated ideologues that can't get past the 60's....it always comes off sounding mean.

The bottom line is that the money this country spends on "welfare" is so comparatively small to all wealth being transfered up to the already obscenely rich (their worth has increased 300 fold in the last decade, while middle class economic growth flatlined) that it isn't worth the time or energy spent arguing it - and is just what the Republicans have wanted you to bellieve and "chew on" to keep you oblivious to what's really happening.

There you have it. If you can't "go there," well, my heart goes out to you. This is a country who believes in taking care of its citizens, and as long as we've a democratic republic, it will always be that way. It's what made us "the greatest nation on earth."

We have plenty of money to pay our debt service it's the "investments" (spending for normal people) on clean and green energy and the like that we can cut without having to raise the debt ceiling.

The Presidents feathers are now ruffled. It appears he is quite upset at the lack of attention over his "BOONDOGGLES" and the BOONDOGGLE spending required to keep them afloat or get them initiated. Please read below and do your research Americans....

Look at his Czars...anti-business..anti- american.
As many correctly predicted from day one, Barack Hussien Obama is
following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University ..
They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system
with government spending and entitlement demands.

Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming.

Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn

the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority

that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted

on to always vote for bigger government.

Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

Universal health care . The health care bill had very little to do with health

care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and

health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions).

Obama doesn't care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans

will add trillions to the national debt.

What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government .
Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill

in the middle of a depression?

Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with
health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming.

It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control
of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama's biggest contributors.
Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns
NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants.

They will kick-back hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to

Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power.
The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars,
bigger homes and businesses helps Obama "spread the wealth around."

Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who's asking for a 51st state?
Who's asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government
entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression?

Certainly not American taxpayers.
But this has been Barack Hussien Obama's plan all along.

His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.

Legalize 12 million illegal Mexican immigrants.

Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America .
But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted
on to support big government.
Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children,
food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and
eventually Social Security ..

Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go?

It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions -- including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country.

It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could
keep paying union dues.

It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out

(after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions).

A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues).

All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their
bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America ..

The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful.

The ends justify the means.

Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job
creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers,

redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did

nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama).

Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Barack Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition. With the acts outlined above, Barack Hussien Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the
system.

Add it up and you've got the perfect Marxist scheme -- all devised by
Columbia University college classmate Barack Hussien Obama

using the Cloward and Piven Plan

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

Serpentine has the right idea. Why raise anyone's tax when you could just increase the number of taxpayers? If we just tax items imports a larger tax then we do companies that manufacture products here you would find the unemployment problem would dissappear. When unemployment is miniscule all of the other problems go away. Don't raise taxes, raise revenue. Along with that we really need to "vet " our welfare recipients better. Drug addiction should not allow any welfare, that is a choice, not a disease. People die all of the time from bad choices. If their families were forced to worry about these folks maybe we would see what they really deserve.......and it could be nothing. Cuts in the right places are not bad things.

usa, Conservatives are adults only in age, not in maturity, intelligence or understanding. Come on now lets see how grown up you really are cause your posts prove you have no ideal what the problem is or how to solve it. Adult my a$$, you are like those Republicans in the house; lie, lie, lie, steal, steal, steal, cheat, cheat, cheat, blame, blame, blame, project, project, projet. Go away child you input in not appreciated.

KRT, after reading your comment you seem to fit that definition of conservative Elle, you too seem to follow in your remarks about unsophisticated ideologues, this is a country who takes care of its people, tell that to all the homeless, try a little humility it goes a long way.

I don't know if any of you will actually see this but I wanted to thank RICH for the civil response. We disagree, but there is no reason for either of us to get ugly about it.

Also thank you all for the suggestion I run for Congress. I have NO (let me be clear about that, none, nada, nuttin' honey) interest in becoming a member of that august body of political idealogues and mental deficients. I am quite happy in my role as gadfly but I appreciate your thoughts.

Finally, I forgot a couple of points. Raise tarriffs on luxury goods made overseas. If you need a 54 inch flatscreen with 4D then find an American company that makes one or pay the higher cost. Finally, tax the crap out of any corporation that sends American jobs overseas. Bring those jobs home and put America back to work.

God Bless you all and God Bless America

Obama/Biden 2012

Add it up and you've got the perfect Marxist scheme -- all devised by
Columbia University college classmate Barack Hussien Obama

using the Cloward and Piven Plan

the hue and cry of the crazy john bircher/tea party extremists.

"secret plans", "evil conspiracies"

right alongside "9/11 truthers"

I have an idea

Cut the wages of all government officials by 25% and CEO's by 80%.

Cap the tax rate for any money you make over $250k to a level no lower than 40% with no loopholes.

Balance the budget on the backs of those who raked in money these past 10 years and received the largest pay increases and bonuses.

I think the above is a much better "Cut, Cap and Balance" approach

The wealthy have made more than their fair share and they should at least pay their fair share. Pay up or start using some of that money to create some jobs and share it that way if you would like a tax break. If those that have it all would at least TRY to invest in the American economy, maybe in the end we could at least be the worlds largest efficient energy producer. We have an opening to invest in and build vehicles and power plants that are very efficient. We have a responsibility to be the world leaders in innovation due to our "free" society and our undeniable ability to adapt to new conditions.

I know this is off topic, but these are just a few of my thoughts for one possible future and some food for thought:

Why not combine all of the most current solar technologies with an electric hydrogen production system. Utilize hydrogen microturbine technology to power our cars combined with 98-99% efficient rare earth (or NdFeB type) magnet servo motor/generators. So through the use of solar power we can make hydrogen and electricity(it would NOT be able to run on solar alone for long trips and would need to be plugged in at night or charged with hydrogen, remember your biggest energy consumer is friction and there are ways to reduce it, but not eliminate it). Embed ALL automobile bodies with a lightweight skin of solar and thermal electric material combined with internal lightweight military grade carbon nanotube 1000 farad capacitors, lightweight batteries, water and hydrogen tanks (LP and HP). When you are at work or parked, you are always storing energy in one form or another. I have already designed a few simple systems in Autocad and I can envision many possible configurations for this type of vehicle. This is NOT a novel idea so I do not consider this idea intellectual property and I am sure there are many other designs out there that have been swept under the table or people just do not have the money to invest in their ideas. This is a real solution to a real problem.

It will take investment in manufacturing and infrastructure to make this happen and frankly, I don't see any wealthy people stepping up to the plate to create a new type of vehicle that will never need gasoline and utilize all available technologies. Yes, there are a few hydrogen powered vehicles now, but they do not utilize what I mentioned above and big corporations do not want to bring in this change now due to the oil kings running things(my assumption, also distribution of hydrogen is currently a problem for those areas that do not get as much sunlight so less intense light, but you could always plug it into an electric outlet).

Hydrogen has a lower energy content than gasoline or natural gas, but it is the most abundant fuel in the universe, unless you consider dark matter fuel(but we cannot utilize that yet or maybe someday extract the energy from space itself...way...way in the future). Hydrogen is also the cleanest burning fuel with no carbon footprint. Too bad, we the people of this world lose again to the oil giants and GREED because we could have already solved this problem if it wasn't for their interference or lack of good faith investment and development to production.

We need to change our ways and start thinking "OUTSIDE" the box....NOW! We Americans can do far more than just write software, service people or write on blogs. We have it within us to strive ahead and be the leaders BECAUSE we are FREE thinkers.

--------------

Let's just stop wasting time arguing about the budget and just solve the problem and move on to bigger things, maybe those people in power are not as smart as they think they are (just corrupt, greedy and selfish). You cannot keep Americans down for long, we will come back with a vengeance in innovation and ingenuity.

This is a manufactured precipice we are in and it is time we change our ways and not let this crap continue!

Such a waste of human energy!!

Cheers!

Only if it is real cuts instead of the bogus cuts the last time we had a "credit crisis"

denial! is a serious condition!

When is the last time you saw a spending bill pass with out a majority of our elected representatives voting for it. WE have the GDP to pay for it and we already bought it. Yes and we need to go back to pay go. The republican got rid of paygo when they got control, that is why we got a problem today. Raise the debt ceiling and re-institute PAY GO permanently.

i agree we need real spending cuts, but we also need measures to increase revenue.... if it was just the deficit we was working on it would be a different story but we have many other issues at hand as well that are affecting the situation that we are in

Any way it goes, we are still spending more than we take in and increasing our debt. Balance the budget or sooner or later we all fail. It is inevitable with the debt, especially when you figure in the monies that Congress has stolen from the trust funds, such as SS, Medicare, and the Federal Employees pension fund.

The US unfunded liabilities are around $115 trillion, yes that TRILLION. So when they say 14 trillion in debt, they are talking out their @ss because their mouth knows better

The government ALWAYS spends, always always. If it didn't we wouldn't have a government would we? We need govt workers, we need soldiers....we can't privatize everything!

There's no such thing as "controlled" spending.

Sally in Chicago, you either do not live within your means or you do not have a household budget. Large coporations operate from a budget. Even Greece is beginning to understand the term. Of course it is becoming apparent that those from Chicago never learned the term "budget".

The bottom line of business is Profit.

The bottom line of government is People - unless it is taken over by business.

You cannot run a government as if it was a business anymore than you can run a business like a government. Two different things.

If you must apply simple personal economics to this problem consider:

if you are in debt and need to get out of debt, you cut back on spending AND you find an additional job/ way to make a living to get more money (revenue)coming in. In fact, sometimes you have to buy clothes or more gas or even an auto to get to that second and maybe third job. Sometimes you have to invest in yourself to get the job done. NOTHING "trickles down" but empty promises and boldface lies.

So hypocritical of all you posters claiming the government needs to cut their spending. Just like the TeaPartiers...you want government cut EXCEPT for those items you want or need.

The Dems came to the table willing to make cuts....maybe not everything, but at least more than they were willing to do before. The Republican's aren't willing to make any compromises at all. Just like a bunch of spoiled children, they want to pout and whine until they completely get their way and who cares what is right or fair.

The MOST important priority right now is for this nation to balance it's budget. That means sacrifices have to be made on ALL sides. Taxes need to increase and many people will have to learn to get by on their own. And for those of you who really believe in the fairy tale that tax cuts for the rich equal jobs, you need to wake up. I have been hearing that fairy tale since the Reagan era....I am still waiting for it to be true....

Stand tall GOP! This is a critical point in American History. If you allow Obama to continue this runaway spending the country will soon be bankrupt and then the poor will have no safety net at all! Shortsighted Democrats will never understand this and it is up to you to stop this destruction of the American economy. If you don't then you will face the same fate as the Republicans who refused to stop the spending under Bush. You will be ousted in the primaries and replaced with more people who love Amerca more than their re-election.

You can't believe anything Obama says...he always skews the truth. By the way, he overspent, why she we fund his spendthrift ways. He spends money like it's water because it's not his.

he always skews the truth.

And MAW, how is that different than any other politician, democrat or republican? They are all the same.

And we been overspending since Reagan. We basically gave Uncle Sam a time portal to go to the future and take money by force to create a fake economy. Now we have arrived to that future and it's time to pay up.

McConnell is talking out of both sides of his mouth. Cutting taxes does not create jobs. We have already tried that and it didn't work. If you want to create jobs, raise taxes. Companies like to pay as few taxes as possible. Salaries are tax-deductible. Increase taxes, and it becomes cheaper to hire more people. Lower taxes, and you give companies incentive to hire fewer people and squeeze the most out of them.

There is no spending problem. The problem lies in not collecting enough taxes from big business and the wealthy. That's a lie that the teathugs have been using for way too long and it's gotten about as old and tired as McConnell.We the American people still remember that it was the teapublicans got us into this mess.Where are the jobs?!!!

Anyone remember Bush senior and his famous "read my lips, no new taxes" speech? He ended up striking a compromise in the end as will the GOP, but before he did he got congress to wring every dime in cuts he could from the budget. His actions set up Clinton to have a favorable economic situation to deal with. History show us that when tax increases are passed without major spending cuts the problem comes back to bite us with vengence!

I agree. Out of control spending on the military and stupid legislation like Bush's prescription drug benefit that favors big pharma instead of actually helping people. also, HIS tax cuts have COST the country dearly. Where are all the jobs Bush and Co. stated would be created by lowering the top marginal rates? He, Cheney and Co. stated they would "pay for themselves". Ha! The cuts are costing this country money...on the backs of everyone else to the tune of what, $3.3 Trillion if they are extended for another 10 years? The 2 year extension adds approximately $560 billion to the deficit and I'm wondering?....WHERE ARE THE JOBS THEY ALL SAID WOULD BE CREATED by extending the cuts? So much for supply side economics.

Let's see, the Republicans added $2.5 trillion to the debt 2003-2006 when they controlled Congress and the White House. If they really wanted to balance the budgets, why didn't they?

Here is the debt from when Bush came in until out

Jan 2001 5,727,776,738,304.64

Jan 2002 5,922,321,839,074.39

Jan 2003 6,389,894,461,722.18

Jan 2004 7,006,834,072,435.49

Jan 2005 7,613,215,612,328.37

Jan 2006 8,175,743,292,992.87

Jan 2007 8,675,085,083,537.48

Jan 2008 9,188,640,287,930.39Jan 2009 10,626,877,048,913.08

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

The final budget for 2008-2009 was signed by Bush and was $1.42 trillion in deficit. That brings the total Bush debt to over $6 trillion. He entered $5.6 trillion in debt and by the time his 2008-2009 budget was finished we were more than $12 trillion in debt.

The problem is not the Democrats willingness to deal.

The GOP has no intention of dealing. They've been doing this since President Obama was elected.

It worked for them as a policy and got them the House. They believe that their attack posture and spin machine can not only continue to sweep them through the House but get them the Senate and the Presidency.

I believe it is going to backfire on them.

Raise the damned debt limit. It has nothing to do with cutting government spending. The debt limit has to do with paying the bills for money we've already spent.

You can't cut taxes and increase spending like the GOP did for eight straight years and then turn around and blame the Democrats for spending us into oblivion.

The GOP drove the ship onto the beach. They then kept driving the engine until it was out of oil and water and blew a head, threw a rod and broke a shaft.

Now that the Democrats have fixed the engine, the GOP doesn't want to wait until the rest of the ship is fixed before derailing us again.

While the richest portion of the country enjoys earnings and riches greater than at any time in the history of the world, the GOP uses scare tactics on middle class conservatives to keep them from seeing the real picture.

They're doing their level best to destroy this country, all in an effort to push out the black guy.

Pride is not one of the things I'm feeling right now

To SJC

The debt was 12 trillion when obama took over and now it is over 14 trillion using the web site you used. That is over 2 trillion in 2 years surpassing the Bush's rate of growth. So if not now when

Sally in Chicago, you either do not live within your means or you do not have a household budget. Large coporations operate from a budget. Even Greece is beginning to understand the term. Of course it is becoming apparent that those from Chicago never learned the term "budget".

No, large corporations cry "too big to fail" and the American taxpayer bails them out. That's the Republican way; privatize profit, socialize risk!

Byron Raum

McConnell is talking out of both sides of his mouth. Cutting taxes does not create jobs. We have already tried that and it didn't work. If you want to create jobs, raise taxes. Companies like to pay as few taxes as possible. Salaries are tax-deductible. Increase taxes, and it becomes cheaper to hire more people. Lower taxes, and you give companies incentive to hire fewer people and squeeze the most out of them.

That is about the weirdest f***ing thing I have EVER heard in my life. All I can say is: LOL

SJC - nice try, but the last 2 years of the Bush presidency added by far the most debt, and that was with the DEMOCRATS in complete control of Congress - you know, the idiots who spend the money? Yeah, both houses, complete control, Democrats.

So how do you explain the debt now?

You on one hand blame Republicans in Congress for controlling Obama's agenda, then take no responsibility when Democrats controlled Bush's agenda, when Bush had to live with both houses under Democrat control, and Obama having his own party in control until 7 months ago!

You libbies are a bunch of thieves and you are being exposed!

Hey SJC:

AT HIS WORST, Bush's deficit spending was 3.5% of GDP. Obama's is hovering around 10%. That's like comparing apples with a big wheelbarrow of sh*t

Paul - it's called selective memory. It doesn't fit their agenda, so why remember? ;)

MSN:..Obama to GOP Let's go!

Please GO! All of you. Disappear. Go to Saudi Arabia and ask Corruption asylum.

Sigh,

Ok.. just as an idea:

1: Kill all bush-era tax cuts. Couldn't afford them then, can't afford them now, never meant to be permanent. All of them, including those on the middle class. Bitch about it later.

2: Cut out medicare, medicaid, and refund social security to all who've been forced to make mandatory contributions. Also, cut out deductions and disability/food stamp benefits for people having kids. Help control population growth a little. The anchor baby idea is crap, but people over here have kids like it's their own personal business, when the benefits start to dry up they just pop out another baby.

3: Institute universal, socialized medicine (yes, socialized, with doctors and hospitals being employees of the government), like every other civilized society with half a brain. This controls ridiculous costs of medical care, and could be nearly completely paid for by getting rid of medicare and medicaid. Focus on preventive medicine, people will be healthier, and require less costly medical care in the future. Raise taxes where needed, if needed, in order to cover.

4: Fed... yeap, abolish it, it was always a pretty bad idea.

5: Troops - withdraw... it's a cluster@#$@ anyways... no matter when you leave, it's still going to suck incredibly bad.

6: Pass a balanced budget with the above conditions taken into consideration. Sit back and enjoy a glass of lemonade.

To everyone bitching about not cutting handouts and benefits, shut up. To everyone saying no tax hikes, we're not talking about tax hikes, we're talking about stopping extra discounts that were never sustainable.... so shut up.

To politicians to scared of their money-men and reelection.... just do the above, get kicked out of office, watch the world start to stabilize a bit, and feel good about yourself knowing you did the right thing. No one will ever agree...so just do it!

Hi Whats ina Name,

Yes, all politicians spin for their position. On that I totally agree. A more informed voting public could do wonders to eliminate most of the spin but we seem fascinated with dumbing ourselves down. Take the Stimulus. If we take the president's own numbers as the truth then each job saved or created cost us around 300k. We will never get that money back in the form of tax payments and yet the president claims his plan was/is a success.

Obama's voter base believes the line that the stimulus was/is a success, yet using the president's own conclusions we are all less wealthy for it. Is there a similar rejection of reality on the right? Do claims of higher taxes hurting economic growth fall in the face of results for instance? I think not. I think that liberals, like Obama, tend to see the world as they want it to be and so their spin to persuade voters is often belied by facts. And I think that conservatives tend to see the world as it is, and their spin, while often off the mark, is informed by facts.

Like your comment that we have been overspending since Reagan. Really? Prior to Reagan we had not had a balanced budget (save the 1969 technical balance) since before WW2. There must've been overspending then too, no? Or is it more important to make the connection to Reagan since he is associated with tax cuts (he signed one of the largest tax INCREASES in history, btw) or deregulation (Carter signed bank deregulation in 1980, btw), and if we can connect "bad" outcomes to Reagan then we ought to be able to prove our point that his form of government (lower taxes and less regulation) doesn't work? That, maybe, you prefer larger government? Whatever the reason the FACTS don't support your spin.

If it helps, I think the stimulus sucked, we're all poorer for it... but at the same time, we can't honestly say what would have happened if it hadn't gone through. We were in a tailspin economy-wise there... we can't really say for certain if the stimulus helped slow that or not. But yeah, the numbers overall for it suck.

Also, reagan signed tax increases, carter signed bank deregulation. Why do we care about Reagan or Carter? We have different problems now, we learn from history, we don't try to imitate it.

evidence that the claims of the john birchers (also known as the "tea party") claim that "the country is becoming more socialist and communist" is just part of their "big lie".

Richard Nixon (Republican) was more of a "progressive" than Barack Obama is.

Nixon created the EPA

Nixon signed affirmative action into law.

Nixon signed the endangered species act into law

Nixon also pressed for a comprehensive health care package that was far more comprehensive than what the retread Birchers denounce as "Obamacare"

Nixon also opened negotiations with communist China, which was truly a communist country at the time. (very unlike it is today)

the claims that Obama is a "screaming socialist" are ludicrous at best

Just like the TeaPartiers...you want government cut EXCEPT for those items you want or need.

And right there you showed you don't know the first thing about the Tea Party. "Items you want" rather than "need" are called handouts. Items you "need" are wanted by the Tea Party only when they are part of the Constitution.

No, large corporations cry "too big to fail" and the American taxpayer bails them out. That's the Republican way

Actually, that would be Pelosi and Reid who did that and Bush's approval rating tanked shortly after with all the right wing media saying he caved in to corporate welfare.

"tea party") claim that "the country is becoming more socialist and communist" is just part of their "big lie".

Richard Nixon (Republican) was more of a "progressive" than Barack Obama is.

Nixon created the EPA

Nixon signed affirmative action into law.

Nixon signed the endangered species act into law

I don't think you know what Socialism or Communism is. Besides, you just contradicted the majority of liberals who claim credit for those things as reasons not to vote Republican.

SJC -

Here is the picture of debt in a nutshell:

Jan 2001 5.7 T

Jan 2007 8.7 T

Jan 2009 10.6 T

Jan 2011 14.1 T

Jul 2011 14.5 T

Therefore,

Bush + Repub Congress = 3 T over 6 yrs = .5 T/yr

Bush + Dem Congress = 1.9 T over 2 yrs ~ 1 T/yr

Obama + Dem Congress = 3.5 T over 2 yrs = 1.75 T/yr

'nuff said.

Post 1 and 2 collapsed!!!! Free speech???

I saw no violations!!! Come on MSNBC do YOUR job too!!!

There were some VERY GOOD posts! Some even left behind the American on American hatred our politicians and the media are trying to promote!

Journalists my a@@!

its OK to make cuts for the poor ,retirement, heath care,and kids as long as the rich don't have to share in the pain

I say make cuts to everyone, especially to the loopholes the rich made to exploit. Also, universal health care. Good idea, control costs, etc. All the rest of the handouts seem to be, overall, counterproductive.

@Rich; Fine, since WWII, or Carter, whatever. Does it make a difference? Republican or Democrat, all you do is nit pick convenient numbers to make your point. Providing facts while ignoring altogether the fine print.

Everyone has a point of view, and everyone spins until they are blue in the face. Just look at Fox News for god sake, or listen to Rush. All they do is spin, and people eat that crap like there is no tomorrow. Your conservative colored glasses only let you see a partial truth, the one that is convenient to you.

The full truth is that the incoming money is less than the one being spent, and we need to use ALL possible tools to fix the problem, not just the ones you like.

I'm sorry, but we all must share the pain together, that's the only way we can get out of this mess. It's time to pay the piper!

Obama is the ONLY adult in the room. Now the ball is in the GOP court. They wanted a big deal, so one is on the table including Entitlement cuts as a sacrifice by the Dems. Where is the GOP sacrifice? NOWHERE.

Its clear to me and probably most Independent voters who is obstructing here. Its the GOP. If we default, the GOP gets the blame. The Presdent has moved to the center and is now the ADULT in the room...where is the GOP?

Obama has made his base uncomfortable, its your turn GOP, Shared Sacrifice

What Boehner and his GOP minions are doing is equivalent to not liking the

"Captain of the Ship" so, you blow a hole in the side and SINK EVERYONE!

The people are the only ones who are going to drown however!

It's a dangerous game both sides are playing with our nation's credit rating at stake, but I find it rather odd that the Dems are proposing $4 trillion in deficit reduction, and the Repubs only $2 to $2.4 trillion.

Remind me again, which one is the party of big government?

The President is coming to grips with the reality of the 2010 midterm election, the votes aren't there to continue the spending. He will not talk anybody into changing their minds because they have been elected by the people with a mandate. Live within your means and no more BS is the will of the majority.

Boehner said " he could not ask the people who we want to create jobs for taxes".

However, since the Corporations took all of their business overseas for tax breaks, why not tax them.

They are getting enough perks already with their out of the country status period.

Boehner, the Great Deceiver!

are you better off than you were 4 years ago?

Can we change the past? No matter who has done what, do we not have to get our spending in order, starting now? Today!!!!! Both parties!!!! And the president!!!!

Better of than I would be if had the Republicans remained in charge, for if that had happend, we would had blown into a complete" DEPRESSION"

Tim, Seattle

Its clear to me and probably most Independent voters who is obstructing here. Its the GOP. If we default, the GOP gets the blame. The President has moved to the center and is now the ADULT in the room...where is the GOP?

It may be clear to you Tim, but you see what you want to see not what is actually going on. Obama has not budged from his extreme left position he is trying to make it seem as if he has moved to the middle for the 2012 election. And he, as you are trying to blame the GOP for the left's hard line on increasing taxes. It is not going to work this time, last year the left passed the largest tax increase in decades to pay for the Obama Care boondoggle. How was Obama positioned on that legislation "I won", remember this was fabricated behind closed doors with only Democrats allowed in the room.

I am an Independent, I registered as one the day I turned 18 and I still have no desire to be associated with any political group

Hi Whats ina Name,

I think a lot of people say we should all share in the pain but don't mean it. Whether it's a liberal who has seen spending radically increase and now is willing to make marginal cuts, or a tea partier with a sign saying to keep your hands off her Medicare, people tend not to want their "free stuff" cut. They instead want someone else to pay more so they can continue to have their free stuff. Our problem is comprehensive, on that you will get nothing but agreement from me, but the solution to it isn't so complex. You want shared pain, fair sacrifice, and all of that?

Fine. Limit the federal government to those powers enumerated by the constitution for it. If you can't make a case that the constitution authorizes, say, federal involvement in local public education, then get out of it. If you can't make a case that the constitution permits federal action in intrastate environmental matters, then get out of it. Several departments could be eliminated or radically scaled back, and tens of billions saved directly with perhaps hundreds of billions gained, or saved, indirectly.

But let's not go down the path that says we should drive up domestic spending radically without paying for it or the constitution authorizing it, and then make the claim that having done this we must all share in the pain by raising taxes even more. All this does is institutionalize the programs and give them a sense of immortality.

My leftist friends can find not a single dollar of federal expenditures that is counterproductive but for law enforcement and/or national defense. Can you believe that? Not a single dollar, leftists seem to argue, spent by the feds does anything but make us a better nation. I say the opposite, I say that much of what the feds do is not authorized by the constitution and therefore makes us weaker as a nation. Why should I want more money to go to the feds to help weaken the USA?

Well roni, I was not as wise as you when I was your age. I turned twenty one in time to vote for jfk, then I voted for lbj, I have been independent ever since. I apologise to everyone for my first two ballots cast. I believe that those two people did more to destroy the fabric of our country than any other pair.

Here are some cuts I could live with: subsidies to oil companies and farmers, wars, and salaries and benefits of congressmen who have no problem cutting the middle class and poor.

Obama the BUDGET BUSTER! {defense budget} ''The overall bill is $9 billion less than President Barack Obama sought''. Obama the Nobel peace prize winner is out of control! Tea party guru Dr.Ron paul ''''There is nothing wrong with describing Conservatism as protecting the Constitution, protecting all things that limit government. Government is the enemy of liberty. Government should be very restrained. ''

Hi Laura,

I can agree with cutting all corporate welfare. I don't agree with cutting salaries of Congressmen because you dislike the reality we are facing. But I have to ask you...

Why do you deserve the money of anyone else? Why should you get free stuff paid for by others? Where in the constitution is this contemplated? And how is it anything different than theft?

If you shopped the way you vote you would be arrested and tried for stealing. Square that circle, please.

Rich, you sound almost like a fellow Libertarian, but you're not quite there yet. Thumbs up on limiting the federal government to those powers authorized by the Constitution, and no others. That immediately limits the Department of Education, Homeland Security, TSA, the DEA and lots of other federal agencies.

As for the rest -- Social Security, Medicare, etc. -- we probably need to ease our way toward the Libertarian ideal of eliminating those federal expenditures, simply because a few generations now have been promised those retirement benefits, and those who have worked have paid into the supposed "trust fund" of SS.

The wise among us plan for getting zero from Uncle Sam, ever, for anything, even when we're retired. But not all of our fellow citizens are wise, or financially secure, so we need to make those cuts gradually, over a period of years.

When we're all done, there will be little need for an income tax, no need for a FICA tax, a gasoline tax, a tobacco tax, etc. And there will be very little need for wealthy professional politicians to strive toward the goal of using political power to make them even wealthier, because the opportunity simply will not exist.

When the federal government has very little power, and lobbyists are a thing of the past, we can get back to the "citizen legislators" that our founding fathers envisioned -- ordinary people who serve in Congress or the Judicial branch or the Executive branch because they are civic-minded and are willing to do a public service -- and after a short time, they go back to their normal lives, without having been greatly enriched by the earnings of their fellow citizens.

Boehner contends, 'Our disagreement is over the idea of raising taxes on the very people that we’re asking to create jobs in our country'

Yeah, the rich really care about creating jobs for americans. That's why the official unemployment rate is still over 9% (the real rate is much higher) and they are richer than they have ever been before.

During the 1950's the tax rate on the top income bracket was 90% and during the '60's it was 70% and most americans had a job and wages were rising.

Explain that you silly @!$%#.

July 11, 2011

Class War Without Mercy

By GREGORY ELICH

One can never have too much money. In the U.S., the top one percent of the population rakes in almost a quarter of the national income and enjoys 40 percent of the wealth. That class sees this as a problem. It is not enough.

For ordinary workers, the recession brought only economic hardship. But for corporate America, it meant one thing: opportunity. This is the chance to permanently mold the economy into something approximating the Third World model: vast wealth and privilege for those at the top, and unemployment, falling wages, and inadequate or nonexistent social services for the rest of society.

The recession ended two years ago, yet more than nine percent of the population remains without work. If one takes into account discouraged workers and part-time workers wanting a full-time position, nearly one sixth of the workforce is underutilized. For people of African descent, the situation is even more dire, with unemployment approaching a rate twice as high. Yet, a jobs program has never been on lawmakers' agenda.

Instead, the trend has been to slash benefits at a time of heightened need, while simultaneously calling for more tax cuts for the wealthy. Deficits run up by the George W. Bush Administration and President Barack Obama have handed the right wing a cudgel to impose their will and discipline workers. President Obama needed no votes from Congress had he been willing to simply let the Bush tax cuts expire. By insisting on an unwinnable partial continuation of the tax cuts, Obama ensured that the entire package would remain in effect. At a time when the recession has caused a plunge in tax revenue, starving the government of funds when it is most needed is exacting a toll on the well being of the population, and opened the door for slashing benefits. According to the Congressional Budget Office, continuation of the Bush tax cuts through the year 2020 will contribute $3.3 trillion toward the national debt. This is money that would be better utilized in providing much needed social services and launching a real jobs program, assuming of course, the political will to do so - which has been noticeably lacking.

Add in the fact that the Bush Administration's wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were mostly run on borrowed funds to the tune of $1.2 trillion. Take into consideration associated costs, and the total price tag on the Iraq and Afghan wars rises to at least $3.2 trillion, according to the Costs of War project. Those wars are still underway, chewing up resources, and for good measure President Obama has added a third war, in Libya. There is no end in sight for military adventurism, and the defense budget remains sacrosanct. For all the talk of budget cuts, this department remains immune. Indeed, the House of Representatives recently voted to boost the already bloated defense budget by an additional $17 billion...

http://www.counterpunch.org/elich07112011.html

Hi azdad,

Hmmm, I'm not sure what I wrote which you would conclude means I am not libertarian enough. But it is what you apparently think. Weird.

@ Rich:

I think a lot of people say we should all share in the pain but don't mean it. Whether it's a liberal who has seen spending radically increase and now is willing to make marginal cuts

Seriously? Out of the almost 4 Trillion dollars proposed, 2/3 are spending cuts, 1/3 is revenue increases. Is that not a compromise? All you hear from republicans is "no tax increase", how is that sharing the pain?

Look, if you're making 300k a year (after deductions) going back to 39% from 35% only means paying $2000 more on taxes. A YEAR! And you are calling these people "Job creators"? What are you gonna do with those $2000? hire an illegal Mexican for a couple of months? Or maybe you want all your employees to get paid $2000 a year.

@azdad: You really need to stop drinking that coolaid. Your ideas would work in a utopian society. In real life there is about 15% of the population who will take advantage of any and all opportunities to benefit by ripping you off. That is why you need regulation, enforcement, and government. To protect the ones that can't protect themselves.

Sadly, what we have now is unfair regulation that benefits large business in detriment of the small ones, underfunded enforcement, and a bunch of corrupt opportunist and liars in the government. We need term limits.

"Whats ina Name"...Rationalizing the current crisis by saying what's so bad about $2000.00 to someone that makes $300k?, without first drilling down to understand "why" the current Administration "needs" more money is the real issue. The Dem control of Congress from 2006 until 7 months ago has unquestionably put us in this economic crisis, they did NOT cooperate in a bi-partisan fashion, and never thought for a moment they would lose control of the House, and now their chickens have come home to roost. The tax payers have done enough...it is time for the Administration to take responsibility, just like they have required the citizens to do, and tighten their belts, roll back the excessive spending and start operating within a budget the Country can afford. Obama, Reid and Pelosi sold the American Public OUT, they need to fix it without taking anymore of our money. If they can't, they need to resign.

Yes, keep dreaming your little twisted truths Paul. Its a shame you can't see that the republican party is hoodwinking you.

In this conservative utopia of yours:

• What happens when you get fired and can't find employment? You're supposed to go sleep in a park and hope you don't die, hope you can find some food?
• What happens if you get sick and you can't afford the outright theft that medical costs are? Just lose all your savings, house, car, or the semblance of any future for your children?
• What happens when you get old and can't work anymore? you get thrown into the street for a fast demise?

Your utopia works in a world without problems. This is the real world.

IWonder-932455

Well roni, I was not as wise as you when I was your age. I turned twenty one in time to vote for jfk, then I voted for lbj

I don't know about the wise part; just like Obama is doing now trying to cover his far left ideology by pretending to move to the center right. Fool me once but I'll not go for it twice, I voted for that buffoon Jimmy Carter.

Well "What's ina Name"...It is not the governments job to take care of you, its your job to take care of yourself. This nation was not built on "Hand-Outs" but we have become the "Nanny Nation"....Keep taking from the people that work, and give to the ones that don't... and eventually there won't be any money left...for anyone. You actually believe that the Government should be responsible to steal from productive people and give the money to those that don't work? The Government has already looted the Social Security Fund to send billions to other nations, they have mismanaged the money they have forcibly taken from all tax payers, they have wasted trillions....but as long as you collect your unemployment, welfare, medicare, whatever...you don't care...right? Just as long as you get your handout.....

The GOP only cares about the light bulb. Go figure!

FYI I don't get any handouts. I work and contribute my share of taxes. I have never taken unemployment, medicare, welfare, or SS distributions. Neither has anyone in my family for that matter.

But here's the difference between you and me, while I care about the greater good of my fellow Americans, many of which have not been as lucky in life as me. You only care about your wallet and how much better off than everyone else you are. Avarice is not a form of social justice.

Yes there are problems, and yes there is abuse. But those problems are controlled by enforcement, not by extermination of the less fortunate.

the GOP only cares about light bulbs?

You must have forgotten all the abortion crap they are so adamant about !!

You are dead wrong again "What's in a Name"...This thread is about the Administration fighting to raise the debt ceiling. This Administration has tripled the debt load, and now not able to meet the needs of social welfare. Obama has spent more money as President than any other 10 Presidents combined, and now is holding elderly and the disadvantaged hostage while he tries to figure out how to pay for what he has foolishly spent. You should be embarrassed for the position Obama, Pelosi and Reid have put this country in, and they should be ashamed for the irresponsible management of the Nations Financial Resources, not defending them. Only 24% of the PEOPLE are in favor of the debt ceiling increase, and I suspect you are one of the 24%. I might add that if you ran your household finances like Obama has run the country's....you would most certainly be on Welfare now.

Ah, so you think I am defending the democrats. Well that's where you are wrong. Just because I call the republicans on their BS doesn't mean I am in favor of the opposing team.

Yes raising the debt ceiling is bad, and that ceiling only should go up to follow inflation. But the repercussions of not raising it now are too ghastly to imagine, some of them unknown. Then again the new cultural fad is to only care about what you want without regard to consequence. It's like if the doctor prescribes you an badly tasting syrup for your cough and you go drink soda instead because it tastes better. Then you end up with pneumonia and you're wondering why.

Sorry, but I don't want to pay for the consequences of the stupidity of others.

"Sorry, but I don't want to pay for the consequences of the stupidity of others"..That is exactly what raising the debt ceiling is...the stupidity of others. Until Obama agrees to roll back the out of control spending, cut all of the pork from the budget, and publicly take responsibility for "CAUSING" the sort fall, the House should stand firm. Giving Obama a new blank check book will result in another debt ceiling increase in July 2012. "When you find yourself in a hole.... the first to do is stop digging."

I don't think you know what Socialism or Communism is. Besides, you just contradicted the majority of liberals who claim credit for those things as reasons not to vote Republican.

allen, my point is that the country is swinging far to the right, people that were once considered "conservative" or "moderate" are now being branded as "communist or socialist liberals"

I so agree. We can never believe everything we hear from the press let alone from our politition as they have their own hidden agenda. Having served in the military and worked from the government in some form or fashion since 1971, I see a lot of government spending fat that needs to cut out as you have thousands of personnel standing around doing nothing and an estimated 1/3 actually working for that pay check. I think the biggest problem that bothers me the most, is that Federal Polititions after a two year service draws the amount they were makeing while serving as retirement along with their health care plane for rest of their lives. I don't recall voting for that policy.

Also, even thought Obama announced the Federal employee pay freeze this year, he forgot to tell everyone that his policy exclude the Federal Politions as they VOTE THEMSELFS A 6.5% PAY RAISE FOR THIS YEAR. I don't remember voteing that law either.

Need to add to my reply above, the 28th Amendment to the Constitution. If you don't know it, please look it up. I'm not going to say what it is as everyone should read it in it's entirety so they get the full meaning of it.

I would prefer an amendment that set term limits. Say 3 terms max in either house or senate and you're done.

michelle-1073610

We are all so sick of the phony BS coming out of DC. Sign a simple bill, raise the debt ceiling because we have to pay our bills, then you can all spend the next year and a half with your stupid arguing...

One Simple question for you.. What is the point of having a Debt Ceiling, if anytime we get close to it we raise it?

Congress has raised the debt ceiling 70 times, they raised it 7 times during Bush, they have continued to raise the debt since 1957.

Party,Party,party.... What dont most of you here not understand??? It is not Dem or Rep, We need to stop SPENDING ourselves into a never ending black hole....Why do you 2 party people fight? As Thomas Jefferson said, if the working people pay for those who wont work the Gov/economy will go broke... Wake up America and see what is happening!!!!

SJC-1437429

Congress has raised the debt ceiling 70 times, they raised it 7 times during Bush, they have continued to raise the debt since 1957.

And you still didnt answer the question.

Exactly what is the point of a Debt Ceiling, if when we get close we just raise it.

Just because we have raised it in the past, does not mean it is the right thing to do. Just because " thats how its always been done " does not make it right.

SO I will say it again.... Why have the cap, when you can take a vote and it gets raised whenever you want to?

Doesn't make sense to me.

So where does it end ? When do we demand fiscally responsible government ??

Thats what I was getting at Jim...

There comes a point in time, where a line in the sand must be drawn.

Some of you are under the impression that I have to answer your questions, I don't. Bush proposed the budgets and signed the budgets, if he wanted balanced budgets he should have proposed and signed them for four years 2003-2006 when his own party controlled Congress, but he did not and they did not.

Bush is no longer President ! Try to stay focused.

Bush is no longer President, but since the Republicans go rid of 'pay go' we are still paying for his 2 wars, tax cuts and Medicare expansion (just to name the major ones). If the Tea Party really is fiscally conservative they should push for a return of pay-go then vote to raise the debt limit for all of the items that W signed and didn't pay for, then attact Obama for the items he signed (like the war and tax break extensions), then move to be more fiscally conservative going forward, or, you know, get a R into the White House, then start a few more wars, expand Medicare and cut taxes whilst saying that 'deficits don't matter'.

jim-

ok your right, lets stay focused. President Obama offered a deal with 4 trillion in cuts including some to medicare, medicaid & social security but wants to raise taxes and close loophole for the wealthiest americans and corporations essentially asking them to first pay their fair share as they should have been all along, and then share in the new sacrifices that are coming for everyone.

Bohener and the republicans counter offer is to only cut 2.5 trillion over the same period slashing medicare, medicaid, social security, education programs, science, etc, so long as none of that money comes from the the people who not only could afford it but owe it to the government. Doesn't sound like they are as serious about cutting the deficit as they are about securing campaign funds from their wealthy contributors.

The irony is that some of the weathiest americans are asking for congress to close the loopholes and raise their taxes. People like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. Warren Buffet actaully admitted that even though he is in the 35% tax bracket after all the loopholes his actual tax rate is closer to 18%. He actually said his tax rate is less than the lady who cleans his house. hat is what we are actually talking about. Am I still focused enough?

Lets say we leave the tax loopholes open for the wealthy and giant corporations. Surely they will just go out and hire new people with that money right? Wrong. Hiring is driven by demand, if no one is buying their product then it is not in the best interest of the company to hire more people to make more products that no one is going to buy. They take that money and they sit on it. Meanwhile american workers lucky enough to still have jobs are doing more for less. Share the love man. if you want to say that makes me a socialist, I am okay with that. Bottom line an economic turn around starts by increasing money at the bottom, not the top. Poor people and middle class people like to buy things just as much as rich people do, why not cut taxes for them and let the money trickle up?

Look at these comments. Nothing worth saying. Just a bunch of children commenting on the article with no real meaning in any of it. State what you each mean take responsibility and state that that is your opinion. I will. I consider this budget/debt ceiling debate a fisico.

This is my OPINION (and that is nothing more than anyone of you has written) that the GOP is a bunch of stonewalling whinners. Not a one of you will change my mind with your statics or your "history" of who was in charge of what and who did what when.

And to me personally, Eric Cantor walking out of the negotations was just a brat! Wait to go Cantor. Way to do the best for this country and do your JOB. I live in his district and will not be voting for him. Unfortunately, he will probably run unopposed as usual as the GOP controlss districting in this state and would like to keep his seat safe.

Whats ina Name......AMEN....Term limits!!!! But I think 3 terms is too much. 2 for the Prez, 2 for the Governors already. 2 for everyone else, not 3. Concentrate on what they're there for (for a change) and then "GET OUT" and stop the dragging and drubbing of the American People down "THEIR" corrupted "Career" path!

Is Obama crazy wanting to raise taxes during near depression era economic times? Mitch Mconnel on {obamanomics}''McConnell said on "Fox News Sunday." "We think it's a terrible idea. It's a job-killer." RONALD REAGAN: ''Republicans believe the best way to assure prosperity is to generate more jobs. The Democrats believe in more welfare.''

Teddy, there is waste and corruption, no doubt. There is also no way to eliminate it--it's the nature of government to be wasteful and corrupt. But you are flat wrong about congressional retirement. They do not get their full pay after just two years service, and they do not get lifetime health insurance. They get the same plan as federal employees get which might be excessive given how the private sector operates, but it is a far cry from your assertion.

drew@

Ps:

President Obama Hang In There And Let The Republicans Self Destruct So Were Done With Them Once and For All . . . . .

That is NOT a good thing for this country. If they self destruct they will do too much damage to our country and economy. I still holed out that the republican will come to their senses. I know... it's a long shot, but miracles do happen.

Neither side gives a rats @ss about you or me. They only care about their power. Their power to buy votes with our money. You want a balanced budget? Erect large enough scaffolding outside the halls of Congress to accommodate 100 nooses. After the first 100 drop, the rest will get their heads out of their @sses. We can start with the leaders on both sides.

"The GOP---the "party of fiscal responsibility?" What a joke."

People do have short memories. It was George W. Bush and his Republican Congress who, in less than 4 years, turned the largest surplus of all times into the largest deficit of all times and didn't include most of the costs of the two wars they started. Bush didn't veto a single spending bill until the his 6th year in office. And it was Dick Cheney who said --- "deficits don't matter". Expecting Republicans to be fiscally responsible is like expecting smoking to cure lung cancer. The ONLY time Republicans even talk about fiscal responsibility is when a Democrat is in the White House.

Charlie...It's time to quit blaming Bush. Obama is president and the "buck" stops at his desk. Look at it this way - If you have a job, how long do you think you could blame the prior person before your boss kicks your butt out the door?

"Charlie...It's time to quit blaming Bush"

Hey --- Republicans blamed Carter for everything they didn't like from 1976 to 1992. Then they blamed Clinton for everything they didn't like from 1992 to 2008. So following their example--- Democrats have another 29 years just to pull even. Now -- I have a problem with Obama's leadership. He should stop playing nice guy with Republicans -- he should have stopped that 2 years ago. He needs to call them out fort what they are --- anti American obstructionist who's objective is not what's good for the nation but on destroying this president at any const.

@Charlie -- do you and others feel that 1% to 5% tax increase on the rich is going to hurt them? No way....they'll find a way to hide their profits, move it off shore. They always do. The rich need to share with the rest of us, and help out those who do not have. A lot of the rich are "inheritances"....these people didn't work for it, it was handed to them. (The Trumps are an example)

We're going down the toilet because American companies want to enjoy the benefits of living in America and being protected, but don't want to share in the pain. -0- taxes paid by some big corporations -- AMAZING!

GE for example. Our president thought that GE is so great, he hired their boss. Guess you don't mind that too much. Tax cheats fit in just fine in the oval office these days.

tunanut
GE for example. Our president thought that GE is so great, he hired their boss. Guess you don't mind that too much. Tax cheats fit in just fine in the oval office these days.

GE for example? Let's talk about oil companies with their causes championed by Bush and the GOP. It's not tax cheating if our dumb a$$ government gives tax breaks when the country is long past broke.

tuna nut, I guess your saying GE cheated on their taxes ? I doubt it's true...

The "Party of Spend" is in power. Remember Pelosi...you have to pass the healthcare bill to know what's inside. Massive spending and regulation have brought our country to it's knees. Does anyone remember Russia where even a roll of toilet paper was rationed? That's where we are headed.

I don't see Rich Democrats lining up to hand over more money to the government. They just get a free pass from the media and brainwashed liberals.

Charlie -

Show us ANY proof that the Democrats are willing to compromise at all! You liberals always talk about the Republicans as being the party of no compromise, yet where have the Democrats shown the ability to do the same? Oh yeah, must have been all those closed door Dem only meetings for the healthcare bill. Must have been the Wisconsin legislators who fled the state instead of doing their job.

Yeah, Republicans are the party of no compromise LMAO!

Point fingers all you want but the fact of the matter is in 2007 our gvmt spent around $2.5 Trillion a year. That was too much (and many of us were yelling and screaming at THAT time to stop spending so much) but Obama is now spending about $3.9 Trillion a year? Sorry, that is not a "tax revenue" problem - that is a SPENDING PROBLEM!! You don't increase spending like that THEN ask for tax increases to cover it!! BTW, even if the taxes were increased as requested by Obama it would only bring in about $150 Billion more a year which is no where close to covering the additional spending (and that is assuming you can increase taxes without negatively affecting the economy which any reasonable and rational person knows is not true).

So here is the deal. If 5 years ago we were able to run this country on $2.5 Trillion then our Community Organizer in Chief should be able to as well. I'll go one step further: even though I am against tax increases if Obama and this administration can get spending back to 2007 levels then even I can get on board with some tax changes to make up the difference but let's be very clear - NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL THIS ADMINISTRATION CAN SHOW IT CAN BE RESPONSIBLE WITH THE TAXPAYERS MONEY!!

This Administration is "Hell Bent" on bankrupting America. Run the Credit Cards to to the max, and then ask for an extension on the credit limits...amazing. Obama will turn this Country into a "Welfare State" if the debt ceiling is increased without cutting the "PORK" that HE as added to the deficit. We can not "spend" our way out of this crisis, and the Obama Administration has done far more damage to this economy that the last 10 Presidents combined. Spend...Spend...Spend...the money we don't have or ever had, when the checkbook is overdrawn....keep writing checks and extort the American Citizens for more money......This is "Change You Can Believe In"?

I never saw a tax increase that created a job.

@PaulWest: the financial problems we face come from many sources; blaming them primarily on this administration (basically because they have chosen - as promised during the 2008 campaign - to use more honest accounting practices) is inaccurate. Regardless of who took office in January 2009, the bills were coming due and the question is what are we going to do about them; while still dealing with a global recession. I guess things can't be that bad because we can only focus on spending and not additional revenue (which would include tax code revisions). Either way, the world will still be spinning tomorrow.

The current Administration has unquestionably authorized record high "NEW" Spending, the highest unfunded mandates in the history of the Nation and continue to spend us into Bankruptcy. The Stimulus alone did nothing but cost the taxpayers trillions...for what? The "Shovel Ready Jobs" that were PROMISED by Obama personally? or is it the 9.2 Unemployment that the Stimulus funded?

Before spending anymore money we DON'T have, and increasing the debt ceiling to enable and fuel more out of control spending.....STOP THE WASTE FIRST. Listen to the people, only 24% are in favor of raising the ceiling...or is this Administration more interested in listening to each other...rather than the people they represent....

Spike W
I never saw a tax increase that created a job.

Spike--really? Taxes are at their lowest since Truman was President. Do you actually think a government can run effectively if it's underfunded. The President made productive offers and the Goops said, "NO". Are they unwilling to compromise to cut deficits? NO ---Did Mr Limbo tell you that he need more tax relief? If the late, great, Ray Charles were still alive he could see that the right is dead wrong.

And, yes is the answer to your question. The defense contractors get the tax money. If those ill advised tax cuts die, they'll still get more than their fair share. I'm sick of dumb ass comments by the right. They will cut domestic spending but vote increases for the military industrial complex.

I hope the President tells Boner to "F" off for every pet project that they propose. Faith based initiatives, defense spending, tax cuts, corporate welfare--screw em!

When you say this, are you including all taxes, Payroll (both sides) Medicaid (both sides) State Sales Tax, Income Tax, Property Tax, etc? The top 20% pay 85% of the Federal Income Tax..What do you suggest they pay????????

Currently the federal government consumes 26% of the GDP.. what level would you like? 30-40%?

@Paul West: I cancelled my access to all cable news months ago (saves quite a bit of money, and I find it helps me have a more positive attitude as well) -- if I wanted to hear that nonsense (which it is if one examines the budget situation in totality), I know where FoxNews is on the internet and I can go there for out-of-context quotes and incomplete budget figures.

Regarding the Recovery Act, wasn't a significant portion of that made up of tax cuts to begin with? I've taken 2 newly rebuilt roads (that were pretty bad and the source of multiple accidents previously) in the last 24 hours that were funded through the Recovery Act. I also recently saw some new software developed by a university (also funded by the Recovery Act) that is seeking venture capital for a commercial product. Like any funding (commercial, private, or government), you're not going to get universal agreement on the value of individual projects, but as these things go, it wasn't the disaster many predicted. I personally would have preferred less tax cuts and more direct infrastructure spending on roads and bridges, but that wasn't the way it happened.

sandtrich,lets talk about oil,BP gave more money to Obama then the Republicans, Hillary Clinton also takes in quite a bit.

The Recovery Act added jobs as was the intention. The last estimate from the Congressional Budget Office that I saw for how many jobs were created by that act said that based on the maximum number of estimated jobs that were created the came at a cost of $228,000 per job to us taxpayers. Based on the low estimate for the jobs created, the cost per job is double that. node4 got his roads and could care less the price those of us that actually pay taxes are on the hook for.

When you have debt you approach it from two fronts not just one. You cut spending and get more revenue. In real life that might be to get a second a part-time job. In government it is tor raise revenue like cut the loopholes for the rich and corporations as they pay on average 17% income tax with them compared to my middle class amount of 27%. Republicans are all animals and puppets for the rich and corporations!

It's those pesky checks and balances that really piss Liberals off.

Too bad it's a Constitutional right for the GOP to disagree agree with the left.

Sandtrich: I hope you realize how foolish you sound? First, Obama has added $1 TRILLION to the annual spending in Washington. Remove that excessive spending (going back to the $2.7 Trillion spending as recently as 2007) and that drops our annual deficit to $300 or $400 Billion a year. When a president adds $1 TRILLION in spending it is not then a "tax revenue" problem but rather a SPENDING PROBLEM!! If Obama gets spending to 2007 levels then I will be the FIRST person to start talking about "shared sacrifice" and "increasing tax revenues" (i.e. tax increases) but there is no logic to adding $1 TRILLION in additional spending THEN talk about how we need to raise taxes to cover it. It is mathematically impossible. You can take 100% of the earnings of those making $250,000 a year or more and it STILL would not cover this excessive spending.

You say you "hope" the president says "F" off to the Republicans. I don't see what is so different about that? The president has been saying "F" off to the entire country!! Amazing that you will let Obama bend you (and the rest of us) over the counter and he doesn't have the common courtesy to say "Thank you"?

There is no more pointing fingers. There is no more "blaming". This is Obama's economy now (he even said so last summer when they said we were "in the summer of recovery"?). This economy is just as bad (if not worse!!) than it was when Obama took office. Unemployment rate 9.2% and rising, over $5 Trillion in additional debt, Obama has killed the motivation of the business sector (due to the massive uncertainty this president has created), and I could go on for hours. This is Obama's economy and it sucks.

So tell me: How is that whole "Hopey Changey" thing working out for you?

clwyd: You people are unbelievable. Obama increases gvmt spending by $1 TRILLION a year and now you say the solution is cut SOME of that increase and raise taxes for the rest? That is so irrational.

Analogy: A husband and wife make $50,000 a year and spending $60,000 a year through 2008. Starting 2009 the wife starts spending $75,000 a year while still making $50,000. The husband finds out and is FURIOUS!! He tells the wife to "stop spending". She tells the husband that he will need to find a part-time job to increase their income (that's the "revenue" you like to speak about) and the wife states she will start finding ways to cut her spending. The answer from her husband is "NO"!! (actually a couple adjectives before the "NO" but I left those out). The husband tells the wife that she MUST cut her spending back to what it was before at $60,000. She cuts spending to $60,000 and he will consider a second part-time job.

In other words NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL THIS ADMINISTRATION CUTS SPENDING BACK TO 2007 LEVELS!! He is being irresponsible with the taxpayers dollars and NO TAX INCREASES until he shows he can be responsible and cut spending to what it was only five years ago.

We do not have a tax revenue problem: WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM!!

@LR: actually I care quite a bit what I pay in taxes and I pay plenty; certainly not looking to pay any more - but not afraid to pay less then my fair share. Determining what is each person's fair share seems to be a major sticking point and I was deeply disappointed that this budget discussion could not simplify the tax code. Until it's no longer riddled with loopholes, we're not going to make it truly fair --- people in every bracket will always find a way to take advantage of it (which is what the people who put those loopholes in intended in the first place)

Regarding your stated "cost per job" numbers; I'll have to examine that within the context of local road construction of the state I live it and how the money was dispersed to the municipalities .... there have been politicians playing games with those numbers since the initial release and I couldn't render an opinion without looking at where they come from and what was included / excluded.

@clwyd-2621393 - agree completely; if you have a serious financial crisis, you attack spending and revenue generation. If you only do one, your agenda is showing.

Orlando Patriot

Sandtrich: I hope you realize how foolish you sound? First, Obama has added $1 TRILLION to the annual spending in Washington. Remove that excessive spending (going back to the $2.7 Trillion spending as recen

Foolish, hey? Ronnie Reagan tripled the National debt. Bush pushed the economy to a state of disaster and is sitting on his ass in a cushy suburban home in Dallas drawing a pension. For what? Lying to get us to war--costing 4450 young American lives. The spending that this President has done has been vastly to SAVE this country, as opposed to drive it in the ground as his predecessor did.

I can tell when you guys know your in deep trouble. GOP talking points start with one of 2 intros:

1) You missed my point all together, (which in reality they have no point to miss)

2) Do you know how foolish you sound? (translation: You have nothing)

Hi Charlie,

You are only partly right. Bush didn't veto any spending bill for too many years, and he was wrong. And Cheney did say, in part, that deficits don't matter. But you ignore the context, and for obvious reasons. Deficits don't matter so long as they conform to two basic rules--first, they grow at a smaller percentage of GDP than GDP itself grows, and, second, they are used for investment of some kind. This could include war, or roads, or any number of things, but the point is they pay future dividends.

Deficits to fund current consumption, aka social programs, fails this test. Obama's deficits, regardless of purpose, exceed the growth of GDP and so fail this test. But there is a third qualifier that I would employ, though I doubt you or any leftist would--the deficit must be related to some constitutional duty of the federal government. This qualifier alone would eliminate the majority of federal spending, but we aren't about to do it given how deeply it would cut into all the free stuff you presently enjoy.

node4....your assumption that I "get my news" from cable or Fox is not only naive but incorrect. Your assumption that I am a Conservative is likewise....well wrong. Facts are Facts....Go to the source my friend....Actually read the data from the GAO...CBO...Congressional Record..etc.....There is an old saying...."Even though liar's can count, Numbers Never Lie".....Glad you got a couple of new roads...even though it didn't employ anyone new, and most likely cost the taxpayers 10x the real cost....the rich keep getting richer..and everyone else keeps paying for it....While your President fuels the Welfare State and his Special Re-Election Interests....Wow...and he actually got elected by denouncing and condemning that behavior.....Not negative...I am a realist...and what I see is absolutly ignorant governance.

Sandtrich: News Flash.... Neither Ronald Reagan nor George Bush are president anymore!! Obama is the president and this is HIS economy now!! This president (Obama) raised government spending over $1 TRILLION per year and has added nearly $5 TRILLION in debt in only 3 years. Bush added less that $1.5 Trillion in EIGHT YEARS!! Of course we did not like it when Bush was adding to the debt and asked him to stop but Obama added more to the national debt in ONE year than Bush did in EIGHT years.

So here is the deal. Obama added over $1.0 Trillion in spending per year so he simply has to cut that same amount to get where it was. He and his cohorts are spending money we don't have and telling Republican's WE are being unreasonable? No, sorry, you show us you can be responsible first. Cut spending over $1.0 Trillion per year to get us back to 2007 levels and THEN we can talk about tax reform to get the rest.

However, NO TAX INCREASES UNTIL OBAMA GETS SPENDING BACK TO 2007 LEVELS!! Show us Mr. President that you can be responsible with the taxpayer dollars and THEN we can talk about additional "revenue" but additional "revenue" will be the LAST dollars in the equation and not the FIRST dollars in the equation!!

OTown Pattie--explain to the grown ups in the room when the unemployment rate is soaring and the social services roles grow to a historical high how a government "cut" spending to a 4 year prior level. President Obama has been business friendly, kept military spending at the same levels. Damn--he's a centrist. From a standpoint of, "I don't need it, but my neighbor does", President Obama struck a deal with satan, (the GOP), to renew Shrubs tax cuts and reduce SS withholding.

Now, the President is willing to chop domestic spending in exchange for letting the tax cuts go away for the nation's wealthiest. Over 80% of Americans approve of this measure. You can just save that vote in 2012---maybe they'll let you vote twice in 2016.

Sandtrich: The adults in the room already understand you cannot take from those that "produce" and redirect to those who "don't produce" and expect economic growth. In fact one of our founding fathers (Thomas Jefferson) said it best when he said "The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.".

You obviously never have taken a college economics course so let me council you so you understand: This belief that government can "spend" money and benefit an economy is a farce. Why? Simple really - remember what GDP is: GDP = (C) Consumption + (I) Investment + (G) Government Spending + (NX) Net Exports. Keep in mind government does not "produce" anything. Their income is not earned by selling its goods or services. So how does government get their money? From taxes. Where do taxes come from? Either (C) which is private households or (I) private businesses. So if gvmt (G) spends, say, $500 Billion they are getting that $500 Billion FROM the private sector. Therefore when the government spends $500 Billion that is $500 Billion that is NOT spent by the consumer and/or business.

So your argument that we NEED government to spend to continue economic activity is a fallacy that the uninformed are told and believe.

I teach college economics and when I discuss GDP I compare it to a factory (its easier to follow the analogy). Say this factory hires 20 people for $35,000 each (so payroll is $700,000/year). Now the government increases taxes another $35,000. This factory must now layoff one worker. They make a little less product therefore makes a little revenue. Now the government takes that $35,000 and splits it between two homeless individuals ($17,500 each) on a bench in front of the factory. How much spending does this "factory" (or let's call this the "economy") produce? STILL $700,000 a year. So even though the government "spent" $35,000 it was offset by $35,000 the private sector does NOT spend. However, something interesting happened. Even though the total spending in this "economy" is unchanged we see that the factory (or "economy") is producing LESS!!

So government spending actually HURTS economic activity. If that money is left in the private sector it will be used to expand business and make it more productive. EVERY dollar taken from the private sector REDUCES economic activity!!

So the solution is simple: Limit the amount of money taken from the private sector so it can be used to create economic growth. SOME government spending is necessary (to maintain law and court systems, national defense, and to manage the NECESSARY functions of government, etc.) but when ALL of our tax dollars received are needed JUST TO COVER social security, medicare, medicaid, Income programs (Earned income tax credits, etc.) and interest on the national debt then we are quickly falling into bankruptcy.

So, in summary, you got an economics lesson for free. You CANNOT take from those that produce and redistribute to those who do not produce and expect an economy to grow. It is mathematically impossible.

So, in summary, you got an economics lesson for free. You CANNOT take from those that produce and redistribute to those who do not produce and expect an economy to grow. It is mathematically impossible.

You know--I just can't read that garbage. In your case, it's pointless--just go to the end and see what you have summarized . Even though my MBA is over 30 years old and from Georgia State University, I actually have taught economics as a adjunct teaches in a community college setting. I can change a single variable in any situation and your "so-called theories" fall like a 80 y/o woman's boobs, (sorry Mom).

orlando patriot, one of the problems with your Jefferson quote is that there are millions that are ready and eager to work, but nobody is hiring.

we have a dozen applicants or more for every job out there, and most of those jobs pay far less than what those that have been laid off used to earn.

can't get it done when republicans don't want it done..........

It's like trying to negotiate with toddlers. When the Democrats say "Why don't we try cutting this?" The Republicans just stomp their feet and say "No I no wanna!" When the Democrats come back and say "Ok, why don't we cut even more?" The Republicans say "No, I no wanna."

Maybe if the Democrats all just up and switched parties the GOP would start doing what needs to be done...

...

Short of that...

When any chance that Obama might get credit for a deal is in the air the Republicans run away.

When any traditional Republican gets sufficient courage to recognize that some cuts to billionaire welfare must take place, they get a gun held to their heads by Tea Party morons.

The Tea Party is reckless and ignorant. The Republicans lack decency or courage. Until middle America sees the light, this foolishness will continue. Not gonna happen.

How about our government cleanup all the wasteful spending? $30 billion dollars in mistakenly paid out unemployment benefits. Is that somehow ok with you liberals? Or is it that you don't actually want to work, just get handed more money to spend?!?

How about our government cleanup all the wasteful spending? $30 billion dollars in mistakenly paid out unemployment benefits. Is that somehow ok with you liberals? Or is it that you don't actually want to work, just get handed more money to spend?!?

How about the $6.6 billion lost in Iraq by the previous administration? No one know where it went, just disappeared!