Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Balog on August 01, 2011, 01:08:29 PM
-
Sounds like insignificant cuts over the next decade, compared to massive debt limit raise now. :mad:
-
I think you've got the same impression I have.
We'll spend $1 trillion less than we were planning to spend (but still WAAAAYYYY more than we are now) over the next 10 years in exchange for letting us borrow $2.7 trillion over the next year and a half.
Gee, that's... great...
-
I just don't get why all the lefties are bitching about it?
-
I just don't get why all the lefties are bitching about it?
Spin.
It's astroturfed "complaints" to make it look like they are giving up on something.
They won. Plain and simple.
More debt, on unborn generations, in exchange for bread and circuses now. I fail to see how that can be called anything but slavery.
-
Increase debt by 2.1 Trillion and it's good until after the election, cut spending by 2.4 Trillion over ten years*. What the liberals gave up was they didn't
rape the rich increase taxes.
* my problem with that "promise" is that the vast majority of those imaginary cuts are always scheduled to happen toward the end of the ten years. In other words, during the next term of office.
-
I'm really hating the new spin over the last ~5 years on budget deficit and planning talks.
Bush-43 started it, in my recollection, and it's now standard practice in the Obama admin and also espoused by Boehner.
Everyone wants to talk about "trillions" in decade figures rather than THIS YEAR'S BUDGET.
Let's talk THIS YEAR. Fund THIS YEAR. Then fund NEXT YEAR.
Quit blowing smoke up our skirts, talking about trillions of cuts in ten years, and comparing it to deficits or borrowing increases for this year.
Otherwise, talk about borrowing increases for 10 years in context of funding for 10 years.
Congress should be barred from enacting any financial policy that extends more than 3 months past their next election.
-
Article 1, Section 8 of that pesky Constitution thing:
Powers of Congress
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
Just add another amendment, that says:
No Appropriation of Money shall be made for any Use for a longer Term than two Years.
-
Any discussion of the details would be inappropriate for a public forum.
-
The current Congress can't impose restraint on a future Congress, so even if they say "We'll spend less in 2015" . . . it really means NOTHING since the Congress of 2015 can, and will, do whatever they can muster the votes for in 2015.
So all this hand-wringing and back-slapping is just utter bovine excrement. :mad:
-
The current Congress can't impose restraint on a future Congress, so even if they say "We'll spend less in 2015" . . . it really means NOTHING since the Congress of 2015 can, and will, do whatever they can muster the votes for in 2015.
So all this hand-wringing and back-slapping is just utter bovine excrement. :mad:
Exactly.
The assumption that a Congressional 10-year spending plan will be honored by Congress 4 years from now is asinine. What exactly do you expect Congress to do for 10 years, if the budget is already taken care of for that period? :mad:
-
Sounds like insignificant cuts over the next decade, compared to massive debt limit raise now. :mad:
Details? Perhaps I can summarize.
The stupid party fought the good fight.
Caved in the end.
Spin it to sound like they made something of it, when really they did not and gave in so the socialist paradise can be further.
And we the taxpayers just got bent over and get to pay for the privilege.
Is that about right?
-
Details? Perhaps I can summarize.
The stupid party fought the good fight.
Caved in the end.
Spin it to sound like they made something of it, when really they did not and gave in so the socialist paradise can be further.
And we the taxpayers just got bent over and get to pay for the privilege.
Is that about right?
I'm trying to think of a major piece of legislation in the past decade that can't be summed up by that.
-
I'm trying to think of a major piece of legislation in the past decade that can't be summed up by that.
Hey I never said it wasn't a predictable part of an ongoing trend.
-
This is the second time Boehner has labored mightly and brought forth a mouse. Last time around what he agreed to was what democrats had previously agreed to. Cuts were an illusion. So now we fast forward to now and see the same things. Congress has wasted stupendous amounts of emotional energy of the public for nothing. I'll be willing to wager a steak dinner at the local Waffle House that nothing is said in the bill of reducing current baseline budget factor from 8% to oh, say 0%. That would result in real cuts not the phoney stuff Boehner evidently agreed to.
My guts are telling me Boehner will face a primary next year.
-
Remember, Reagan was promised $3 in cuts for every $1 in tax increases, and got $3 in new spending for every $1 in tax increases. Same shell game, different year.
-
So, it's not all fuzzy kittens and puppy kisses ??? The caterwauling by the Religious Left is them going all Sun Tzu on us?
Damn, I was afraid of that.
-
So, it's not all fuzzy kittens and puppy kisses ??? The caterwauling by the Religious Left is them going all Sun Tzu on us?
Damn, I was afraid of that.
What caterwauling by the religious left? I never got the impression they were a force to be bothered with.
-
The Religious Left as described by George Will. Those that worship Government. Many news summary sites show headlines from the left expressing disgust with the Dems caving. Krugman, Van Den Heuvel, et al. Just sayin'. IMHO, we're re-arranging the deck chairs on the fiscal Titanic. I just wish I knew if it was gonna be a bang, or a whimper.
-
We'll spend $1 trillion less than we were planning to spend (but still WAAAAYYYY more than we are now) over the next 10 years in exchange for letting us borrow $2.7 trillion over the next year and a half.
*sigh*
Washington Cuts strike again.
Notice who unanimously voted for the bill. Anyone know if Paul the Younger will filibuster this thing?
-
Boehner screwed us all.
-
Tough crowd here.
I didn't realise Boehner had such indomitable control of the Senate. Last I checked, he led the House which was only a 55% Repub majority. And the Senate was a Democrat majority. And the presidential veto is held by a Democrat President who stamped his foot and pouted his lip at anything he didn't like; without offering any compromise.
My point:
America's fiscal problems were not created over night. From the welfare state, to SS, Medicare, and the trillions of things that make up our debt; these have been erected over decades. They will not be solved in one election. They will not be solved in one budget vote.
PS.
Doesn't the "boner" comments violate the goals of maturity?
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=11378.0
-
Additionally...
The original post might find this site useful for distilling the facts and details.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/08/help-me-crowdsource-the-bill/
-
Tough crowd here.
I didn't realise Boehner had such indomitable control of the Senate. Last I checked, he led the House which was only a 55% Repub majority. And the Senate was a Democrat majority. And the presidential veto is held by a Democrat President who stamped his foot and pouted his lip at anything he didn't like; without offering any compromise.
Constitutionally, the Senate doesn't matter.
I want a House Speaker that tells the Senate to go take a flying stab at a rolling donut when it comes to fiscal bills, citing Article 1 Section 7.
All spending bills MUST originate in the House. Anything originating in the Senate is unConstitutional.
Boehner isn't leading. Plain and simple.
In the LONG TERM, an immediate default for a week or two is better for the health of the country, if it results in drastic change now, than status quo.
And $2.7 trillion for 18 months in exchange for nebulous $1 trillion in cuts over 10 years (or $100 billion a year, or about $150 billion over that same 18 months) is an insult, joke and threat to the American People.
That makes Boehner a threat to the American People.
The only thing that saves us is direct confrontation of evil.
But, Biden and Obama are already lauding the removal of the deficit obstacle from the political arena in the 2012 elections. God forbid they be accountable for their policies that brought about the fiscal murder of this country. And Boehner is an accomplice. Along with McCain and the other Statist Apologists.
-
My point:
America's fiscal problems were not created over night. From the welfare state, to SS, Medicare, and the trillions of things that make up our debt; these have been erected over decades. They will not be solved in one election. They will not be solved in one budget vote.
Boehner and most of the house rinos chose to carry on with 'business as usual.' [barf]
The House had the Cut/Cap/Balance bill and Boehner, with the help of McConnel undermined the bill.
The Cut/Cap/balance bill wouldn't have been signed by el presidente, but it was at least a strong position to negotiate from.
In football terms, The House Republicans were on defense and the ball was at the Dems 10 yards line, and Boehner allowed the ball to be waled down into the red zone and gave Obama everything he wanted.
-
Really? Everything he wanted?
So there is a tax increase in this bill?
Grandstanding with a bill that would barely pass House, and never pass Senate, and would never override a veto is not actually helpful. It may, in fact, hurt the negotiating position.
-
Really? Everything he wanted?
So there is a tax increase in this bill?
Grandstanding with a bill that would barely pass House, and never pass Senate, and would never override a veto is not actually helpful. It may, in fact, hurt the negotiating position.
There didn't need to be a tax increase in the bill, since the Bush tax cuts - that were extended - will expire shortly after the election anyway.
I very much doubt Obama will sign another extension, whether he's re-elected or not.
-
This pretty much sums it up...
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/08/we_the_stupid.html
August 1, 2011
We The Stupid
Ann Barnhardt
I stand here in abject stupefaction. The so-called "right" or "Tea Party" in this republic is being so thoroughly rolled and defeated that I am struggling to come up with an adequate violent submission metaphor that does not involve prison rape . . . and they honesty think that they're "winning." Really? You call this winning?
- Obama gets over $2 Trillion to spend before the 2012 election
- There are no real spending cuts
- There is a massive tax increase effective January 1, 2013
Obama is going to be handed something in excess of $2 Trillion -- and he has made it perfectly clear that he will spend every penny of it before the November 2012 election. That's why he kept saying, " . . . so we don't have to do this again", meaning raise the debt ceiling again. The debt ceiling would only need to be raised if all of the money had been spent. Therefore, he has stated very clearly that he will spend every penny of any debt ceiling increase. He is going to burn through $2 Trillion-plus in the next sixteen months. This was the Obama regime's plan from day one. Geithner appeared before Congress in early May and told them this in no uncertain terms. This outcome has been a known quantity all along.
There are no spending cuts in this plan. It is all accounting fraud. Saying that you are not going to spend money in Afghanistan ten years from now is not spending cuts. Even if you accept the $1 Trillion in cuts over ten years propaganda, that is only $100 Billion per year, which is essentially meaningless relative to the size of the problem. Furthermore, even a miniscule uptick in interest rates, which given the massive debasement of our currency is now a mathematical certainty, will completely consume that $100 Billion per year. It's all a joke.
Back to the $2 Trillion that Obama is being handed. I honestly think that most people in this country have no understanding of simple counting numbers. Do you not understand how much a trillion is? Where do you think this money is going to come from -- who has two trillion dollars to loan us? China? Nope. Not even close. China's entire GDP is only $6 Trillion. Do you honestly think that China is going to loan us one third of their total annual economic production? China was a huge creditor to us back when $100 Billion was considered a staggeringly large amount of money - which was four years ago. Now $100 Billion is literally a rounding error. Do you realize that there are only a handful of nations of this planet that even have a GDP in excess of $2 Trillion? If these countries loaned us every penny of their GDP, it wouldn't even be $2 Trillion:
Canada ($1.57 T)
India ($1.54 T)
Russia ($1.46 T)
Are you starting to understand the scope of what we are talking about now? Obama is going to embezzle considerably more than the entire economic output of Canada, India or Russia to his cronies before the 2012 election -- and that is just counting this round of spending. This doesn't include the other $5 Trillion he has already burned through since 2009.
China is not going to lend us this money because they simply don't have anything close to that much money to lend. This $2 Trillion is going to come from the Federal Reserve. Where is the Federal Reserve going to get $2 Trillion? They are going to print it out of thin air. We are in the midst of the largest currency debasement ever seen in human history. There is only one result that can come of currency debasement: hyperinflation and total economic and societal collapse.
Have you also forgotten the so-called "Bush tax cuts"? Yeah. Those rates are going to expire on January 1, 2013. Obama will presumably still be occupying the Oval Office at that time assuming that he is not forcibly removed or that the Republic is still intact at that time. Taxes will increase significantly at that point, and the Congressional Budget Office has scored everything put before them given the fact of the massive tax increases on 1/1/2013. Do you understand that? When these Republicans and even these so-called "Tea Party Freshmen" tell you that there are no tax hikes in their "plan," they are consciously, willfully, knowingly lying to you through their teeth.
Finally, I do not understand how it can possibly be that conservative writers are still addressing Obama as if he is actually trying to help the economy, but his well-intentioned policies are failing.
Obama is the enemy. Obama is a Marxist-Communist usurper and puppet front for a cabal of Marxist-Communists who are actively trying to destroy the United States of America. Everything they have done, are doing, and will do has the single goal of collapsing and destroying the U.S. economy, military, constitutional government and culture. What part of "Marxist Revolution" do you not understand?
The Obama regime is not a failure. The Obama regime is not incompetent. The Obama regime has achieved more in two and a half years than anyone could have possibly foreseen. It has debased the currency by 50% of the GDP and guaranteed that our economy will collapse. It has looted the Treasury for more than the size of a top-ten economy and embezzled that wealth into the hands of their fellow Marxists in preparation for the final collapse of the United States. It has ground the economy of the United States to a screeching halt. It has destabilized the entire Muslim world and ensured that there will be a nuclear war centered around Israel within the decade.
The Obama regime has no interest whatsoever in "stimulus" or "getting folks back to work." How can you not understand this? How can we possibly win this war if we refuse to come to terms with the fact that we are in fact fighting a war.
God save the United States of America, because the people are far too stupid to do it themselves
-
I have been reading a lot of Ann Barnhardt this year. She doesn't pull any punches.
-
I've listened and read and thought a lot about this....and I've come to this conclusion....
....the Republicans didn't cave in to the Democrats....
....the Republicans caved in to the big business and financial interests who are affected by this deal....
....think about it....who were the ones that predicted economic ruin if the deal wasn't passed? Who stands to benefit most if the Treasury Bond ratings aren't downgraded? Who stands to benefit if the gov't continues to buy goods and services on the extended credit line? And who is funding the bulk of GOP incumbents' re-election campaigns?.....
....this is going to be the Tea Party's greatest fight....not against the Democrats and RINO's....but against the mega-corporations and mega-banks that use their money and influence to get legislation passed that benefits their bottom line without giving a tinker's damn about how it affects the citizens and the nation as a whole....and I'm not sure that it's a fight that the Tea Party can win....
....let me clarify....I'm not anti-business.....in fact, I'm very much pro-business and pro-free-market....but what we have now isn't either....if anything, we've just arrived into the gov't/big-corp oligarchy that Paul Veerhoven illustrated in the ROBOCOP movies....and now both parties are giving up the ruse of gov't that represents the people to show their true agendas....
-
I don't have NEAR enough ammo on hand. `nuff said.
-
the real problem is in paying down the debt. this means both sides are right. we need to slash spending, and raise taxes. didn't anyone else see this happening ten years ago? we were in a war spending trillions, and the economy was still tanking (even with tax breaks). what really bugs me is that all the political posturing on both sides seems to get us to a planned result from the start. it just seems that the two major parties are working together to keep the average american in such a dizzied state so that they can do anything they want (including making my paltry savings even less than worthless). viva ron paul! (sorry, i had to say it)
-
we need to slash spending, and raise taxes.
Raising taxes just means that those who are carrying the load will carry some more load.
I'd be ok if raising taxes meant that Obamas core constituency had to start paying.
As Obama said "Its time to eat our peas." That should go double for the entitlement class who have had a free ride so far.
-
What Obama didn't get from The Stupid Party to grease his re-election, he will get from Bernanke with QE3, 4, and 5, as needed. It should be obvious by now that there were no real cuts; it should also be obvious that as long as Congress is comprised of liars and power seekers who realize "public service" is a license to steal there will be no cut-off of the incomprehensible sums of money now changing hands. The entire Congress, not to mention the Executive Branch, needs a TIME-OUT. All of them need to be reminded they serve us, not the other way around. The time for politeness and civility is over. Right now the American people are no more than bystanders in this process, looking in from the outside while a small number of men bypass the Constitution, work deals behind closed doors, and unashamedly create "Super Congresses." ENOUGH.
-
Well, this thread has been all very passionate and all, but I still haven't heard anyone suggest what should/can be done about it, except to vent on internet fora. From any historical perspective, our country has easily reached justification to use the Third Box of politics, but speaking of a people who wielded the first two so poorly, I can't imagine any such action having positive results. Personally, I'm still hoping for a military coup, but that institution is itself rather watered down, so who knows.
-
All I can and will say is I am stocking up, loading up and FED up!
-
The Tea Party is great, but in my view we are still going to need an organized and visible and massive civil rights movement that represents the principles of our Founding. Perhaps it will take losing the 2012 Election before there's enough motivation. I hope not.
-
All I can and will say is I am stocking up, loading up and FED up!
I'm OK with that.....as long as you don't Perry-Up....that scumbag would have voted for the plan, too.... ;/
-
This here:
This pretty much sums it up...
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/08/we_the_stupid.html
August 1, 2011
We The Stupid
Ann Barnhardt
- Obama gets over $2 Trillion to spend before the 2012 election
- There are no real spending cuts
- There is a massive tax increase effective January 1, 2013
Obama is going to be handed something in excess of $2 Trillion -- and he has made it perfectly clear that he will spend every penny of it before the November 2012 election. That's why he kept saying, " . . . so we don't have to do this again", meaning raise the debt ceiling again. The debt ceiling would only need to be raised if all of the money had been spent. Therefore, he has stated very clearly that he will spend every penny of any debt ceiling increase. He is going to burn through $2 Trillion-plus in the next sixteen months. This was the Obama regime's plan from day one. Geithner appeared before Congress in early May and told them this in no uncertain terms. This outcome has been a known quantity all along.
.....
God save the United States of America, because the people are far too stupid to do it themselves
causes me to wonder. Does anyone see preparations being made for dealing with civil unrest? Police training, police hires, purchases, national guard or army troop placement, wargaming, that sort of thing? A hardened bunker for the township supervisor?
Just wondering.