Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Obama Plans Huge Shifts in Spending

  1. #11
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,055

    Re: Obama Plans Huge Shifts in Spending

    The deficit is so astronomically huge, that I, not anything remotely close to an economics major, can't wrap my head around it. When my finances go into the red, I have to tighten the belt and make a mad dash for increasing my income or things start to fall apart badly. How has our government even been able to function for the past twenty-five years?

  2. #12
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Obama Plans Huge Shifts in Spending

    By redirecting enormous streams of deficit spending toward programs like health care, education and energy, and paying for some of it through taxes on the rich, pollution surcharges, and cuts in such inviolable programs as farm subsidies
    Good idea? Definitely.
    Will it happen? Not a ****ing chance.

    Mr. Obama takes credit for $2 trillion in deficit reduction over 10 years, three quarters of which comes from lower expenses in Iraq and Afghanistan and most of the rest from tax increases on the wealthy and revenues from a market-based cap on greenhouse gas emissions.
    These claims are just getting ridiculous.

    Obama says he's going to save $1.5T by cutting costs in Iraq and Afghanistan over the next 10 years. How the **** is that going to happen? He could stop spending a penny on any war tomorrow and the total "savings" over 10 years wouldn't come close to $1.5T.

    According to Peter Orszag in 2007, (pdf) the total cost to continue the Iraq and Afghanistan wars under the Bush plan from 2008-2017 would be $1.055T. So, considering that Obama has already pledged $140B for this year, that means that in order for us to "cut costs in Iraq by $1.5T" over the next 10 years, we need spend -$600B over the next 10 years.

    Do they just make these numbers up or what? I've got no problem with optimistic projections based on facts, but these bull**** immeasurable statistics like "jobs created or saved" are really starting to irk me.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  3. #13
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Obama Plans Huge Shifts in Spending



    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #14
    Advisor rebelbuc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Last Seen
    08-21-17 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    574

    Re: Obama Plans Huge Shifts in Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    From the article:



    When we came out of World War II, the top tax rate was an insane 91% to pay off the war debt. These projections for cutting the deficit in half by 2012, unless we see some solid economic growth, I don't see it happening. Of course, deficit projections have never been very accurate more than a couple of years out.

    I just don't see how we are going to be able to afford to do Universal Healthcare right now. Debt service as a percentage of Federal Outlays could hit an all time high. It is foolish for Democrats to take on a huge expansion of public sector spending on Healthcare right now given the current deficits, and it was very foolish for Republicans to squander the large surpluses they inherited from the Clinton years. We were on a solid track to retiring a large amount of public debt had the Republicans not cut taxes twice and sent spending through the roof.

    Just the same, the past cannot be changed and we have to contend with the hand we have been dealt. It seems to me that due to current deficits, the amount of money its going to take to recover from the financial crisis, and the amount of money its going to cost to fix Medicare, that Universal Healthcare has got to be off the table right now. We are going to have to cut Defense spending down to a military we can afford. We are going to have to completely eliminate the costly Medicare Advantage plans. We are probably going to have move to some kind of Medicare means testing. We are going to have to return marginal tax rates to 90s levels (but not until the economy starts recovering), we are going to have to do something about disability which is taking up more and more of federal outlays, and we are going to have to curb a lot of these farm subsidies.

    Everyone, regardless of whether they are on the right or left is going to have to sacrifice spending priorities or we are looking at a disaster.
    You make a lot of good points. Perhaps, Obama should focus on putting able-bodied welfare recipients to work instead of pushing legislation reversing the trend over the last 16 years to reduce the welfare roles. Also, excessive taxes on productive Americans (as you cited from many years ago) only slows the economy... doesn't help. And what about Obama and the Democrats' plans to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction above a certain level? How would that have any effect besides destroying the market for large houses? And eventually bringing the economy down another notch!
    Last edited by rebelbuc; 02-26-09 at 03:18 PM.
    Obama lied... Ambassador Stevens died!

  5. #15
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Obama Plans Huge Shifts in Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post


    That graph is equally misleading, because it only counts the on-budget numbers. When you include the off-budget numbers (i.e. Social Security) things look a lot different.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #16
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,419

    Re: Obama Plans Huge Shifts in Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by rebelbuc View Post
    You make a lot of good points. Perhaps, Obama should focus on putting able-bodied welfare recipients to work instead of pushing legislation reversing the trend over the last 16 years to reduce the welfare roles. Also, excessive taxes on productive Americans (as you cited from many years ago) only slows the economy... doesn't help. And what about Obama and the Democrats' plans to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction above a certain level? How would that have any effect besides destroying the market for large houses? And eventually bringing the economy down another notch!
    Welfare and other safety-net programs only amount to 6 to 8 percent of federal discretionary outlays. The big social programs are the entitlements: Social Security, Medicare, and Disability(SSI, SSDI). However, those are primarily funded out of payroll taxes, and in the case of Social Security, there is a current surplus.

    If conservatives are going to have any credibility on reducing the fiscal size of government, then they can't argue for cutting programs like welfare in one breath, and argue for increasing defense spending in the next. Get rid of welfare entirely and you will have huge deficits. Defense spending will have to come under the budget ax just like other discretionary spending will have to be. This absurd garbage spewed by some that since defense spending is authorized by the constitution, that virtually any amount is ok, is a slap in the face to the founders. They did intend for this nation to spend more on defense than the next 18 nations combined. We have a bigger military than we can afford just like we have a bigger disability program than we can afford and its all going to have to be cut.

    I would also point out that if there is any large federal program that is ripe for privatization its disability. Disability insurance is not overly expensive in the private sector. Instead of having this huge expensive federal program, just require individuals purchase the coverage themselves just like we require you to have insurance on a car.
    Last edited by SouthernDemocrat; 02-26-09 at 08:28 PM.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •