Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    7:49 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Time to Call the President's Budget Bluff Back to Topics
teacher_tim

Champion Author
Maryland

Posts:18,677
Points:813,460
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 10:50:43 AM

By KEITH HENNESSEY
"Flush with the adrenaline rush of his election victory, President Obama insists that Congress must now agree not only to raise taxes on the "rich," but also to adopt his previously ignored full budget. The president demands a $1.6 trillion tax increase over the next decade. He maintains that higher revenues must come from marginal-rate increases but offers no policy rationale. He wants to treat $900 billion in spending cuts he agreed to in 2011 (as part of the Budget Control Act) as if they now count on his ledger as new cuts. He says that he will consider Medicare cuts and tax reform in the future, maybe.

On the other hand, Mr. Obama says reductions in ObamaCare spending are out of the question, and Congress must now agree to at least $50 billion in new stimulus spending next year. The debt limit must be permanently increased without accompanying spending cuts.

By contrast, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell have offered on behalf of Republicans a significant concession in an attempt to close the negotiating gap. Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell propose to accept higher taxes on the rich as long as government spending is cut significantly and incentives to work and invest are not weakened. That way, higher taxes and entitlement-spending cuts would reduce future deficits, not finance even bigger government as the president proposes.

Unfortunately, it appears that President Obama cannot take yes for an answer. Republican leaders have shown him a legislative path to lock in his top policy priority with a strong bipartisan vote. Their proposal splits their own caucus, yet still the president refuses because he thinks he can get even more."

link to source

Then watch Obama blame the Republicans like the Bakers' Union blamed Hostess. Negotiations are a two-way street; Obama should have someone explain that to him.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,457
Points:2,198,205
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2012 2:50:40 PM

Mudtoe, I like your where you went with your idea, that would be ideal!
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,677
Points:813,460
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2012 12:31:14 PM

mudtoe,
Throw some defense spending cuts in there and you have a plan.
Profile Pic
md11capt
Champion Author Denver

Posts:4,594
Points:1,131,450
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2012 12:28:52 PM

So call it. Like Mitch McConnell did yesterday.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,384
Points:1,768,420
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2012 11:09:03 AM

The House should pass a bill with big entitlement cuts, and modest revenue increases, along with a raising of the debt ceiling. Then they should go home for Christmas and tell Obama to take it or leave it. If he leave's it, then the debt ceiling doesn't go up and the Republicans get the spending cuts they want that way.


mudtoe

[Edited by: mudtoe at 12/7/2012 11:10:16 AM EST]
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,726
Points:139,290
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2012 9:47:08 AM

"You do realize that the majority of all of the negotiations are done via video and voice conference right?"

Obama is not committed to the process what-so-ever. It's tax the rich $1.6T and $1T in spending cuts are already in place (all entitlements are off the table). To make sure nothing gets voted on, he demands debt ceiling control which is not legal. What is he negotiating on? He gave a non-negotiable ultimatum and left town -- he washed his hands of the process, hoping for sequester so he can "save the Middle Class".

If Bush left town in the same situation, Chris Matthews would be spraying spit yelling and pounding his fist on camera.

Send $1.6T to a vote now, Republicans vote "present" so Democrat have enough votes. It doesn't matter as any skilled accountant can legally maneuver their clients around the changes. Anything not covered is pushed to cost of goods sold and consumers pay the penalty.

Let Obama and Democrats fail on their own ignorance

[Edited by: e_jeepin at 12/7/2012 9:48:29 AM EST]
Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:22,204
Points:875,250
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2012 9:06:20 AM

More fear and bluster from the right. Thanks, I have had enough of that crap.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,677
Points:813,460
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2012 8:54:28 AM

I wonder if the Republican proposal could possibly have been a reaction to "I want 1.6 TRILLION in new taxes, increased spending and I'll talk about cuts later, maybe. Oh yeah, I want control over the debt ceiling, too, even though the Constitution says it's a Congressional power."
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,050
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Dec 6, 2012 7:27:15 AM

Paxman356: "Just that Bowles rejected the thought of it being tied to him. That's not a minor difference."

That's just politics. The differences in policy/approach are minor.

Paxman356: "Hey, we want all these cuts, but we aren't going to get into specifics on revenue increases at this time? I want some of what they are smoking, it must be good."

I support this approach. Overhauling the tax code is neither a minor effort nor should it be a political football. It certainly doesn't deserve a knee-jerk reaction. Agreement to tackle that difficult and necessary issue would be a major step forward for our country. If only Obama would stop his posturing/politicking and start governing/leading.
Profile Pic
PappaVanTwee
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:14,635
Points:714,710
Joined:Feb 2003
Message Posted: Dec 6, 2012 6:26:42 AM

>>>
Do you see how minor the differences are?
<<<

Just that Bowles rejected the thought of it being tied to him. That's not a minor difference.

And this:

-----
The GOP also did not specify what kind of revenue the party would accept as an immediate down payment in 2013, and aides said their goal remained a comprehensive tax overhaul that would generate $800 billion in new revenue while lowering overall rates.
-----

Hey, we want all these cuts, but we aren't going to get into specifics on revenue increases at this time? I want some of what they are smoking, it must be good.
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,592
Points:2,844,505
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Dec 5, 2012 11:38:33 PM

The debate/discussion in Congress about this fiscal cliff issue should be shown on live television. People/voters need to know what each side is proposing.
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,239
Points:149,355
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 8:13:33 PM

Y
I think its gonna be a ripple, but neverless kink in the armor.
Profile Pic
YDraigGoch
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:7,346
Points:86,435
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 8:10:45 PM

I thought it was a cliff. Now it's a bluff. Is this really a mountain echoing in the canyons of our minds? Are we walking into the valley of death?

Is this a topic, or topography?
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,239
Points:149,355
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 4, 2012 8:05:56 PM

As soon as the republicans understand he dosn't have to do anything. Game over the options kick the can, negotiate, or rebuild political credibility after the 1st of January.

Sure glad i dont have johnnies job.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,338
Points:1,408,645
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 11:37:15 PM

AZ mike - maybe its way past time when Obama lears finally what real leadership means. Now leading from behind or leading via a cell phone from the golf course.

I repeat he is the irresponsible president. He seems to have a real tough time accepting responsibility and "standing his watch".

This is best exemplified in his spewing the lies that it was a spontaneous demonstration when he knew it wasnt and then sending others out to spread the 'falsehoods' and so forth. If the man would ever take responsibility I might develop some respect for him.
Profile Pic
fracknsave
Champion Author Grand Rapids

Posts:1,666
Points:58,000
Joined:Mar 2012
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 9:47:04 PM

If we could only get him to play 18 in the morning, 18 in the afternoon, and 9 after dinner everyday, I would consider making him my under-vacationed messiah as well. The republic would be far better off if he wasn't so half-hearted about his golf game.
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,050
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 9:36:59 PM

michaelpheonix2: "Plus you also have to keep in mind that President Obama has had one of the fewest vacation days taken of the last few presidents."

But he's had more campaign days and he's the most disengaged POTUS in history!
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,050
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 9:32:27 PM

Paxman356: "Bowles rejected the comparison, and said that while he was “flattered” by the citation, the GOP letter “does not represent the Simpson-Bowles plan, nor is it the Bowles plan.”

Let's see.

Republican Plan

"In addition to the $800 billion in revenue, the Republicans are proposing $600 billion in health savings, $300 billion in savings from other mandatory spending and $300 billion in further cuts to discretionary spending.

The GOP is also proposing to raise $200 billion through changes to the way inflation is calculated for the purpose of determining benefits and tax policy across a range of programs, including Social Security."

The Bowles Plan

"Over the course of the next decade, the new Bowles proposal would raise $800 billion in revenue, cut $600 billion from health care programs, slash annual discretionary spending by $300 billion, save $400 billion in interest payments because of the other cuts, and reap $200 billion from changes to the way the consumer price index is calculated, he told the members of the supercommittee."

Do you see how minor the differences are?

Paxman356: "In other words, nothing new. Don't you think it's time to get serious on COMPROMISE here?"

Yes. It is time for Obama to get serious and put an honest proposal on the table. His plan has tax increases for the wealthy, more spending and spending cut *gimmicks*. IOW, his proposal only contains tax increases and spending *increases*. He called for a "balanced approach" during the campaign and he should at least put a "balanced approach" on the table now that the cliff is rapidly approaching!

[Edited by: turbosaab at 12/3/2012 9:35:17 PM EST]
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 9:26:33 PM

You do realize that the majority of all of the negotiations are done via video and voice conference right?

He can do those things from anywhere.

Plus you also have to keep in mind that President Obama has had one of the fewest vacation days taken of the last few presidents.

[Edited by: michaelphoenix2 at 12/3/2012 9:31:26 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,338
Points:1,408,645
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 9:12:16 PM

.
>>>The estimated costs to taxpayers of this latest vacation foray is in excess of $4 million. The largest single expense is Obama's 747 jet, Air Force One, which runs about $182,000 per flight hour. It's a nine-hour journey, each way, between Washington and Honolulu. That's about $1,638,000 one-way. Their bags fly free.

Those transportation totals do not include the costs of Air Force cargo planes to haul the fleet of armored cars to the island and back, so the Obamas can visit Hawaii friends, beaches and restaurants. And so the president can get to a nearby Marine base for his morning workouts and to various golf courses with friends.

Besides covering the Christmas and New Year holidays, Obama's vacation dates also strangely coincide with what was expected to be the peak negotiating window for Obama and congressional Democrats and Republicans to address the so-called fiscal cliff. Until recently the cliff has been described as something of a financial doomsday, albeit one that Obama and Capitol Hill protagonists set for themselves.>>>






We have a fiscal crisis and he isnt even there to vote present. His leadership is to run away - again. Looks like the irresponsible president is up to his old tricks.
.
But not to worry he has 54 Christmas trees for when he aint there.

[Edited by: flyboyUT at 12/3/2012 9:17:26 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,338
Points:1,408,645
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 9:05:40 PM

Ok lets go back to Clinton era taxes...
.
>>>Even as he pushes $150 billion in new "stimulus" spending, President Obama argues that to avoid the fiscal cliff we must return to Clinton-era tax rates for wealthy households, with a top marginal rate of 39.6% vs. the Bush-era 35%. Clinton's was an age of balanced budgets and economic growth.

But it was also an era of budgetary restraint in which both parties, not just the GOP, still produced budgets.

It was one, too, in which a Republican Congress led by House Speaker Newt Gingrich produced welfare reform, killed the precursor to cap and trade — Bill Clinton's BTU tax — and stopped ObamaCare's predecessor, HillaryCare, dead in its tracks.

As the Cato Institute's Steve H. Hanke points out, when President Clinton took office in 1993, government expenditures were 22.1% of GDP. When he departed in 2000, the federal government's share of the economy had been squeezed to a low of 18.2%, a decline of 3.9 percentage points. No other modern president has even come close (see table).

Under Clinton, federal spending averaged 19.8% of GDP. In contrast, spending under Obama over the past four years has averaged 24.4% of GDP.

Revenues from Clinton-era tax rates were actually used to pay down the national debt and produce four successive budget surpluses. Obama's tax increases will simply fund new spending.

The spending restraint of the Clinton/Gingrich era was so successful and disciplined that it led President Clinton in his January 1996 State of the Union address to proclaim that "the era of big government is over." In contrast, President Obama has argued that "the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little."

Not only has he increased total welfare spending by $193 billion since taking office, he has also ballooned the number of food stamp recipients to more than 47 million and actively worked to dismantle the 1996 welfare reform act by neutering its work requirement through executive order.

...

Obama has been very selective in his admiration of the Clinton era. Adopt the spending levels and restraint,Mr. President, not the tax rates.<<<Ok lets call his bluff - if he want to have the same tax rates as Clinton fine he can have it. But he also has to spend only as much as Clinton did too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Profile Pic
PappaVanTwee
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:14,635
Points:714,710
Joined:Feb 2003
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 8:33:51 PM

>>>
Ahhh...it looks like the Republicans made a serious offer. The "Bowles Proposal"
<<<

Only one problem with calling it that:

-----
Bowles rejected the comparison, and said that while he was “flattered” by the citation, the GOP letter “does not represent the Simpson-Bowles plan, nor is it the Bowles plan.”
-----

Another problem:

-----
The $800 billion in new tax revenue matches what Boehner offered Obama during their 2011 negotiations for a grand bargain. Republicans are holding the line against tax rate increases, and believe the $800 billion in revenue can be raised from the wealthy through other means, which their offer does not specify.
-----

In other words, nothing new. Don't you think it's time to get serious on COMPROMISE here?
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,050
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 4:41:52 PM

I75at7AM: "House GOP makes a $2.2 trillion debt counteroffer to Obama on cliff"

Ahhh...it looks like the Republicans made a serious offer. The "Bowles Proposal"

[Edited by: turbosaab at 12/3/2012 4:42:56 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,338
Points:1,408,645
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 4:20:02 PM

Since everyone wants some kind of offer ---- here is one for ya....




Go back to the tax rates and rules of Bill Clintons last two years. But also go back to spending no more than was spent then too!
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,943
Points:2,921,545
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 4:17:04 PM

In response to "Chirp" "Chirp" "Chirp" down below:

House GOP makes a $2.2 trillion debt counteroffer to Obama on cliff

"House Republican leaders have made a counteroffer to President Obama in the fiscal cliff negotiations, proposing to cut $2.2 trillion with a combination of spending cuts, entitlement reforms and $800 billion in new tax revenue.

The leaders delivered the offer to the White House on Monday with a three-page letter signed by Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), and four other senior Republicans, including Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the party’s just-defeated vice presidential nominee."

OMG. Paul Ryan. Kiss that proposal goodbye, nobody is goiong to listen to that self-righteous lunatic. He hates women and everything. Evil capitalist pig.

Next!!!
Profile Pic
turbosaab
Champion Author Cleveland

Posts:19,018
Points:2,342,050
Joined:Sep 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 4:15:22 PM

michaelphoenix2: "I mean actual counter offer not just they offered up a bill last year for their base to get excited about."

In order for the Republicans to provide a "counteroffer", there has to be a serious offer on the table. As others have said, there is no serious offer on the table. The President has offered to increase taxes on the wealthy and continue spending like we have money to burn. That doesn't even meet his "balanced approach" of the campaign. When the President is ready to put a serious offer on the table, then I will expect the Republicans to counter it. If he refuses, then off the cliff we go. It will be his problem.......his recession.
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 3:15:49 PM

So what is the republican counter offer in the negotiations? I mean actual counter offer not just they offered up a bill last year for their base to get excited about.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,457
Points:2,198,205
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 3:09:54 PM

Michael states: <<<The president has offerd up a plan>>>

Yeah, a plan to increase taxes by 1.6 trillion OVER 10 years, and increase spending, and a statement that perhaps we might make a few cuts in the future. Translated: Tax and spend, not the tax and streamline that America needs. Oh, he also wants congress to hand over power to him to just categorically move the budget limit whenever the whim calls him.

He's not serious about the budget, he is only serious about redistribution of the country's wealth.
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 3:09:44 PM

Flyboy ---- How many of those bills were pure statement pieces developed to merely satisfy their base and were never expected to pass the senate. How many of those bills included no democrat input and were meant to merely rally the tea party?

if they seriously wanted those bills to be debated in the senate they would have actually talked with the other side before submitting a bill that they knew before hand that the democrats would have said no to.

i believe it is the republicans who have been recently shouting compromise doesn't mean you agreeing to everything the other side wants to do. The same can be said of them. They have to be willing to compromise on some of their sacred cows as well.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,338
Points:1,408,645
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 2:59:52 PM

"If all else fails the con led do nothing Congress can do what they usually do (nothing) and let the new Congress do the work."

How many bills has he Republican led House sent to the Democrat controlled Senate? How many of these bills have been allowed (by the Democrat Dingy Harry) to even be discussed much less debated, amended,voted on and sent back to the House for reconcilation?

How many budgets have the Democrat controlled Senate passed in the last four years?
Profile Pic
michaelphoenix2
All-Star Author Tucson

Posts:887
Points:12,080
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 2:55:19 PM

Again what is the Republican pla?

The president has offerd up a plan, the Republican response was that it was not enough. When asked what they wanted they only said more. They don't know what they want in a deal but all they know is they don't want what the president is offering.

If they come up with some SPECIFIC cuts that they want then they have a leg to stand on. Until then all it is, is just partisan whining.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,457
Points:2,198,205
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 2:50:50 PM

<<<And the Republican plan is?>>>

The house has passed a couple of budgets, and sent them to the senate only to have them unceremoniously killed and thrown away. Harry categorically blocks just about anything that comes from the house, to where there is no conversation or debate about it, or even a counter offer. Nothing. This is where Obama might look a little more presidential if he even was to pretend that he cared about the fiscal cliff negotiations.
Profile Pic
BlackGumTree
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:18,444
Points:1,459,940
Joined:Dec 2005
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 1:53:52 PM

gocatgo - "At long last cons can stand up and be counted for the down trodden top 1-2% wealthiest Americans."

Conservatives are standing up for the poor and down-trodden and middle-class more so than those at the very top.

The spending of the last four years has weakened the dollar so that it is not worth as much as it used to be. This doesn't hurt those at the top. Instead it hurts the middle-class and mostly the poor.

A functioning economy would help the poor and middle-class the most but Obama and the Democrats have not done anything that has helped the economy. Liberals want to take investment capital from the top and use it in "stimulus programs" that simply enrich their friends before they go bankrupt.

Meanwhile no one in the Obama administration has any idea of how to get the economy going again. That is probably why great amounts of money have been wasted over the last four years. And these idiots want to raise the debt ceiling? If they had any brains they would work on reducing the debt ceiling to zero. Manage the money correctly and there is no reason to be borrowing funds from others.
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:29,731
Points:3,611,000
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 11:55:43 AM

And the Republican plan is?

Chirp
Chirp
Chirp
Profile Pic
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,726
Points:139,290
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 11:42:54 AM

We cant keep proclaiming the obvious dangers of Obama. His 51% believes every word he says, no questions asked, the media agrees. Obama and the Senate have gotten away with doing nothing for 2 years coasting to the election win. Pathetic!

There is no way the Republicans can fight the propaganda, so time to turn his own plans against him. Republicans need to make Obama own the next 4 years without any excuses and alibis of blame.

The only way is to let Obama and Democrats destroy themselves with their own (non) plan.

Their weakness is fiscal responsibility -- take advantage of this! The Republicans can only win again when Obama supporters turn against him when no results surface -- simple as that.

Dont proclaim "Obamas plan wont work" -- let it prove itself a failure to those who support him.

However, this has never worked in the City of Detroit after 50 years of Democrat pure government (and failure)

[Edited by: e_jeepin at 12/3/2012 11:48:55 AM EST]
Profile Pic
gocatgo
Champion Author South Carolina

Posts:18,676
Points:3,019,110
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Dec 3, 2012 11:34:01 AM

At long last cons can stand up and be counted for the down trodden top 1-2% wealthiest Americans. Both parties are gutless when it comes to giving the numbers and specifics of which entitlements will be cut. Each wants to blame the other for the cuts. I do believe the ball is in the con's corner to come up with a counter offer. It's about time the anti socialist party works up the courage to say what they want to cut instead of whining about socialism.

Tim, "link to source" had no specifics other than cons want Obamacare on the chopping block. Also there was no mention of defense cuts the #1 con Golden Cow.

If all else fails the con led do nothing Congress can do what they usually do (nothing) and let the new Congress do the work.
Post a reply Back to Topics