• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boehner abandons goal of $4 trillion debt-reduction package

j-mac said:
Make him cut it first, I'll believe it when I see it from him.

j-mac
Click to expand...

No you won't, you'll just credit it to the Republicans, even though he publicly endorsed the idea.
 
Swizz said:
No you won't, you'll just credit it to the Republicans, even though he publicly endorsed the idea.
Click to expand...


so let's see him do it...I don't believe a word that comes from this liar's mouth.

j-mac
 
if obama wanted entitlement reform we'd have it

see obama's 2012 budget published in february

see kent conrad's plan, put forth in a phone call last week to wapo

no, the white house is the last holdout against reform, ask governors cuomo and brown and omalley and malone, ask the state legislatures of massachusetts, new jersey and illinois, ask the city managers of detroit...

the dithering admin in dc, however, is coming around, bullied by reality

where will we be in a week?

and, more important, where will medicare be ten years from now if something isn't done imminently to save it?
 
Last edited:
BDBoop said:
What happens if they revolt? What are they going to do? Hold their breath? Have a tantrum?
Click to expand...




Cheerleading the continued destruction of this once great land for your side is sad. 4 trillion in spending cuts would have helped this nation.....
 
Objective Voice said:
I'm not even trying to go there with you. Welfare reform isn't the topic of discussion.
Click to expand...

Dont try to shove child poverty statistics at Reagan like they are his fault when divorce is the single leading indicator in childhood poverty. Dont make bad arguments.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Dont try to shove child poverty statistics at Reagan like they are his fault when divorce is the single leading indicator in childhood poverty. Dont make bad arguments.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a bad argument at all. Money (the mismanagement OR the lack thereof) remains one of the leading causes of divorce in this country, second only to infidelity. When couples are constantly arguing over money, their marriage is bound to fail. It happens with rich couples just as it does poor couples. The only difference between the two is atleast the rich can mitigate their financial woes in a divorce with pre-nums and their kidos get to atleast keep their trust fund and the Lexis.

But I digress...

I will no longer address welfare related issues nor Reagan's economic/tax policies with you or anyone else in this thread. If you wish to discuss either, start a new thread on the subjects.

Back to the issue of the debt ceiling...

I posted a link to a NYTimes article discussing the 5 Myths on the debt ceiling. However, that article didn't outline the consequences for everyday Americans if the debt ceiling isn't raised. But this white paper by Thirdway.org explains the very real, very potential consequences of doing nothing or delaying for even one 24-hour period (which incidentally also mirrors the warning given under myth #3). I think everyone should read this paper to get a real, no-politics understand of what's at stake.
 
Last edited:
finebead said:
Yes I do have an idea what these "tax loopholes" are, and the article calls them "tax loopholes", contrary to your asserstion that there are NO TAX LOOPHOLES, there are, and there have been since I've been alive, almost 60 years, and I am sure there were tax loopholes before that.
Click to expand...
Yes, tax loopholes exist.
No, despite what the article says, the tax expenditures under fire are not "loopholes" they're just run-of-the-mill tax credits like your home mortgage interest deduction.

finebead said:
Maybe you'd like to explain why we should borrow money, increase the debt of the nation, and devalue the dollar to give the money to the oil companies that are making billions in profit every quarter. I don't know of ONE oil company that is losing money. They don't need a tax break, period.
Click to expand...
I say put your money where your mouth is and demand that *all* corporate tax expenditures end. It's a natural and necessary step to take if Obama is serious about his goal of a "revenue-neutral corporate rate reduction."

Instead, they choose to single out two industries - oil and private jets - not because it makes good economic sense, but because it makes political sense. The *ONLY* reason they're offering these up is to paint the picture they want to paint of Republicans.
 
Deuce said:
That's because you haven't been bought by said wealthiest Americans and special interests. If they were funding your campaign, you'd see how it's a good thing!
Click to expand...

I actually meant, how was it a good thing for the American people, but of course you are absolutely right about why the GOP is abandoning their deficit reduction efforts. It will be good for them politically and to hell with what's good for the country.
 
cpwill said:
"A significant faction of the tea party movement is prepared to revolt against any GOP deal to raise the debt ceiling
Click to expand...

Sure, but what are they going to do, vote for a Democrat? :lamo
 
a no politics understanding of what's at stake:

In 2006, Mr. Obama struck a high moral tone in opposing legislation to raise the debt ceiling. “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure,” he said. “It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”
Click to expand...

link above, jake tapper
 
Objective Voice said:
From finebead's post #75:

Towhich I will add, "The voices of the rich and powerful majority typically drowns out the voice of the impovished minority."
Click to expand...

I was addressing my poat to you and nowhere does it claim that Ronlad Reagan was responsible for class warfare.

Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the meaning, avoiding a response or don't want to admit to your hyperbole.

These unsupported charges by posters responding to their feelings rather than the facts can get overdone sometimes.
 
Boo Radley said:
I learned a long time ago Finebread is a bright fellow. I suspect he understands this all quite well. Just saying . . . . :coffeepap
Click to expand...

I'm sure he is a fine fellow.

But he is not the subject of any debate.
 
donsutherland1 said:
I'm not blaming Congressman Boehner. His move reflects the reality of the situation of irreconcilable differences. It's a move that would not have been necessary had the negotiating process been better-designed, namely had the White House set the ground rule that each side open with a position that it felt had realistic prospect of being acceptable to the other. Then, the tax revenue piece, among some others, would have been put aside from the onset and hard bargaining toward a deal would have been underway.
Click to expand...

Well, as someone that negotiates for a living, I'd have to say that you're dead wrong! No one negotiates from the middle, if they expect win, Don. That is of course, if the point of negotiating in the first place is to come out better off than your opponent. Some will say that the goal of negotiation is to come out better than when you went in, but in either scenario, both tangible, and intangibles accoutned for, I don't see how that can be accomplished with a mddle-out approach. The middle out approach, works when you go in with nothing, and come out with something, but both sides went in with something. Either way, becuase winners and losers will be all the media focuses on, and how elections are won, the middle-out approach is a political none starter as well. Meeting in the middle is one thing, but starting there is not a good tactic, IMO.


Tim-
 
those in favor of reform, and the myths surrounding them:

Top Democrats in charge of keeping the Senate in Dem hands and maintaining the political health of the party — DSCC chair Patty Murray and messaging chief Chuck Schumer — have privately expressed frustration that deep Medicare cuts risk squandering the major political advantage Democrats have built up on the issue, people familiar with internal discussions say.

Senators Murray and Schumer, along with other Dems like Debbie Stabenow and Mark Begich, have warned against deep cuts in recent leadership meetings, a source familiar with the meetings says, another sign of the unrest that the possibility of serious entitlements cuts is creating among Congressional Democrats.

The frustration on the Senate side is mirrored on the House side. Sam Stein reported on Friday that DCCC chair Steve Israel privately vented his frustration that serious Medicare cuts would hamper his ability to recruit good Dem candidates to challenge House GOP incumbents. And a number of Dem challengers have already launched their campaigns by alluding to the GOP’s unpopular Medicare plan, a reminder of just how central top Dem strategists want it to remain through 2012.
Click to expand...

Top Senate Dems privately warn: Deep Medicare cuts will squander our big advantage on issue - The Plum Line - The Washington Post
 
finebead said:
Yes I do have an idea what these "tax loopholes" are, and the article calls them "tax loopholes", contrary to your asserstion that there are NO TAX LOOPHOLES, there are, and there have been since I've been alive, almost 60 years, and I am sure there were tax loopholes before that.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know the article says there are "tax loopholes", Finebead, and you have said there are "tax loopholes" but I'm asking you to get specific as to what these "tax loopholes" are. It seems to me you, and thousands of others, are repeating these two words as though they have some significance when in fact they really mean nothing. These two words are designed to make you feel that others aren't paying their fair share and are therefore deserving of your frustration and anger, just as was plain in your post.
Maybe you'd like to explain why we should borrow money, increase the debt of the nation, and devalue the dollar to give the money to the oil companies that are making billions in profit every quarter. I don't know of ONE oil company that is losing money. They don't need a tax break, period.
Click to expand...

Perhaps tax breaks aren't necessary. I really don't know. But the point of our discussion was tax loopholes, not tax breaks.
 
liblady said:
let's make deep medicare cuts and continue the tax breaks to the wealthy.
Click to expand...

can't right now

but that's exactly what's gonna happen in about 2 weeks

prepare
 
Catawba said:
I actually meant, how was it a good thing for the American people, but of course you are absolutely right about why the GOP is abandoning their deficit reduction efforts. It will be good for them politically and to hell with what's good for the country.
Click to expand...

Perhaps BHO should have mentioned his $4 trillion deficit reduction plan when he was in control of the house and senate for two years.

Instead he seemed more interested in spending than reducing. And of course he never even had a budget!
 
governor andrew cuomo's philosophy:

"we have the worst business tax climate in the nation, period, our taxes are 66% higher than the national average"

"the costs of pensions are exploding... a 476% increase and its only getting worse"

"the state of new york spends too much money, it is that blunt and it is that simple"

"an unsustainable rate of growth and it has been for a long time"

"not only do we spend too much, but we get too little in return"

"the large government we have is all too often responsive to the special interests over the people"

"new yorkers are voting with their feet, two million new yorkers have left the state over the past decade"

"what does this say, it says we need radical reform, it says we need a new approach, we need a new perspective and we need it now"

"this is a fundamental realignment for the state"

"the old way wasn't working anyway, let's be honest"

"we want a government that puts the people first and not the special interests first"

"what made new york the empire state was a not a large government complex, it was a vibrant private sector that was creating great jobs"

"and that's what's going to make us the empire state again"

"at the heart of this state is business"

"we have to relearn the lesson our founders knew and we have to put up a sign that says new york is open for business, we get it, and this is going to be a business friendly state"

"we are going to have to confront the tax situation in our state, property taxes in this state are killing new yorkers, thirteen of the sixteen highest tax counties are in new york when assessed by home value"

"westchester county has the highest property taxes in the united states, nassau county has the second highest"

"it has to end, it has to end this year"

"we have to hold the line on taxes for now and reduce taxes in the future, new york has no future as the tax capital of the nation, our young people will not stay, our business will not come"

"put it simply, the people of this state simply cannot afford to pay any more taxes, period"

"we have to start with an emergency financial plan to stabilize our finances, we need to hold the line and we need to institute a wage freeze in the state of new york, we need to hold the line on taxes, we need a state spending cap and we need to close this $10 billion gap without any borrowing"

GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS | Governor Andrew M. Cuomo

bear in mind, the governor is not just talking, he's already moved

Cuomo budget: $10 billion deficit cut, no new taxes, layoffs likely

and NEW YORKERS, of all audiences, are giving the gub standing O's

Andrew Cuomo approval sky-high, new poll suggests - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

in politics, we call that THE LAY OF THE LAND

deal with it, obama must
 
The Prof said:
governor andrew cuomo's philosophy:

"we have the worst business tax climate in the nation, period, our taxes are 66% higher than the national average"

"the costs of pensions are exploding... a 476% increase and its only getting worse"

"the state of new york spends too much money, it is that blunt and it is that simple"

"an unsustainable rate of growth and it has been for a long time"

"not only do we spend too much, but we get too little in return"

"the large government we have is all too often responsive to the special interests over the people"

"new yorkers are voting with their feet, two million new yorkers have left the state over the past decade"

"what does this say, it says we need radical reform, it says we need a new approach, we need a new perspective and we need it now"

"this is a fundamental realignment for the state"

"the old way wasn't working anyway, let's be honest"

"we want a government that puts the people first and not the special interests first"

"what made new york the empire state was a not a large government complex, it was a vibrant private sector that was creating great jobs"

"and that's what's going to make us the empire state again"

"at the heart of this state is business"

"we have to relearn the lesson our founders knew and we have to put up a sign that says new york is open for business, we get it, and this is going to be a business friendly state"

"we are going to have to confront the tax situation in our state, property taxes in this state are killing new yorkers, thirteen of the sixteen highest tax counties are in new york when assessed by home value"

"westchester county has the highest property taxes in the united states, nassau county has the second highest"

"it has to end, it has to end this year"

"we have to hold the line on taxes for now and reduce taxes in the future, new york has no future as the tax capital of the nation, our young people will not stay, our business will not come"

"put it simply, the people of this state simply cannot afford to pay any more taxes, period"

"we have to start with an emergency financial plan to stabilize our finances, we need to hold the line and we need to institute a wage freeze in the state of new york, we need to hold the line on taxes, we need a state spending cap and we need to close this $10 billion gap without any borrowing"

GOVERNOR ANDREW M. CUOMO STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS | Governor Andrew M. Cuomo

bear in mind, the governor is not just talking, he's already moved

Cuomo budget: $10 billion deficit cut, no new taxes, layoffs likely

and NEW YORKERS, of all audiences, are giving the gub standing O's

Andrew Cuomo approval sky-high, new poll suggests - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

in politics, we call that THE LAY OF THE LAND

deal with it, obama must
Click to expand...

This Andrew Cuomo guy. Is he the head of the Tea Party?
 
Grant said:
Perhaps BHO should have mentioned his $4 trillion deficit reduction plan when he was in control of the house and senate for two years.

Instead he seemed more interested in spending than reducing. And of course he never even had a budget!
Click to expand...

Which Presidential candidate, other than Obama, voted against our entering the optional war in Iraq that cost this country so much in blood and debt? Where were the GOP candidates that now claim to care so much about the US debt. Oh that's right they are still defending the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

As long as we can still afford multiple optional wars and tax cuts for the wealthy, we really don't have a debt problem that I can see.
 
The Prof said:
that dogma got run over by obamite karma

U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions - USATODAY.com
Click to expand...

Hate to break it to you there Prof, but the US funding for future promises lagged by trillions before Obama became president. He and the Democrats have agreed to $4 trillion deficit reduction but the GOP said we are not poor enough yet to give up the tax cuts for the wealthy, so no thanks!

We will just have to wait until the GOP figures out the debt problem is big enough to address.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom