Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 144

Thread: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

  1. #51
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Yes, but the thing is that republicans, the party of fiscal responsibility supposedly, when in control did nothing, and when not in control block doing anything in terms of the deficit.
    When in control: Reagan's non-military spending cuts the largest in history; surplus of the 90s.

    When not in control: Voted near-unanimously against stimulus, health care bill, etc.

    Also, a slim majority voted against this particular method of reducing the deficit.


    I'm not saying Republicans are always fiscally responsible. But to say that they are entirely fiscally un-responsible is just as untrue.

  2. #52
    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: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    And of course here we see part of the problem with your suggestion. Since republicans have shown no willingness to cut spending, suggesting that they would support it, if only it was the right cuts rings false.
    I don't think that the average conservative on DP is a good reflection of the average Republican in the Senate.

    They have had the chance, and did not do it.
    Completely true, though I don't think that necessarily proves they would be opposed to it now.

    As a side note, if you look at the annual growth in "discretionary" spending under Bush, it's not particularly large once you exclude Homeland Security/Defense/Veterans - just 3.1%.

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy...get/tables.pdf (page 5)

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    ss is NOT a "pet project, btw, it's the only income many people have in their old age.
    Which would horrify the people who came up with SS in the first place. SS was designed as a safety net form of insurance for the destitute, not as a sole or critical source of income. Unless we fix the way people treat the program, we're screwed.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  3. #53
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Which would horrify the people who came up with SS in the first place. SS was designed as a safety net form of insurance for the destitute, not as a sole or critical source of income. Unless we fix the way people treat the program, we're screwed.
    But that was an entirely different time when people saved, and the economy was not completely dependent upon the hyper driven consumer/service spend fest. There are trade offs in an economy of this size given the high income per capita. SS becomes a necessity.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #54
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    as were his deficits. and as a percentage of our economy, no, the revenues were not record breaking.
    Yes, they were. Just because more was spent doesn't negate the reality that MORE revenue was taken in. That's a very dishonest stance you've taken.

    "Hey, Bush cut taxes and the Government revenue's were record breaking."

    "Yeah, but they spent more too so really the revenue's weren't all that great..."


    Your logic, eludes reason Redress.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  5. #55
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Yes, they were. Just because more was spent doesn't negate the reality that MORE revenue was taken in. That's a very dishonest stance you've taken.

    "Hey, Bush cut taxes and the Government revenue's were record breaking."

    "Yeah, but they spent more too so really the revenue's weren't all that great..."


    Your logic, eludes reason Redress.
    And wow, did you ever one time consider the demographic differential between post 2000 and the Clinton 90's? Probably not, and surprisingly not...... So....

    Did the population grow since 2000? Did wealthy americans (of which pay the most in taxes) see an increase in incomes post 2000? What is the short term effect of a government budget increase?

    Lets start there
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  6. #56
    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: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    But that was an entirely different time when people saved, and the economy was not completely dependent upon the hyper driven consumer/service spend fest. There are trade offs in an economy of this size given the high income per capita. SS becomes a necessity.
    First, as low as today's personal savings rate is, it is still higher than it was when SS was enacted.

    U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

    Second, even were that the case, there's a serious question of cause and effect there. Are people relying more on SS because they're too broke to save, or are they saving less because they know that they will have SS? I think there is very strong evidence that it's the latter.

    Given that we've seen a drastic increase in disposable income in terms of real dollars:

    U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

    (From $6,900 in 1929 to $33,000 in 2009)

    I find it very hard to believe that people are less able to save today than they were when SS was instituted.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #57
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    And wow, did you ever one time consider the demographic differential between post 2000 and the Clinton 90's? Probably not, and surprisingly not...... So....

    Did the population grow since 2000? Did wealthy americans (of which pay the most in taxes) see an increase in incomes post 2000? What is the short term effect of a government budget increase?

    Lets start there
    Liberals will do anything to ignore the fact that everytime we cut taxes revenue's go up. It's amusing really.

    If Higher Taxes are so great, why are Cali and New York doing so bad.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  8. #58
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Liberals will do anything to ignore the fact that everytime we cut taxes revenue's go up. It's amusing really.

    If Higher Taxes are so great, why are Cali and New York doing so bad.
    By ignoring my questions and setting up a weak straw man, you are accomplishing what exactly?

    Bad? You are going to have to be far more specific. I doubt you are up to the task
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  9. #59
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    By ignoring my questions and setting up a weak straw man, you are accomplishing what exactly?

    Bad? You are going to have to be far more specific. I doubt you are up to the task
    Let's compare three states.

    New York
    California
    Texas

    New York is Broke | NBC New York
    New York has run out of cash and Governor Paterson ordered his budget staff to delay payments to counties, schools, local governments and non-profit service providers until things improve.
    During today's speech on Wall Street today, Governor David Paterson and his staff revealed that despite actions taken last week by the state legislature, New York state will essentially end the month of December with a negative billion dollar bank balance.
    Tax revenues experienced the worst year to year drop in memory. Sales taxes dropped 11 percent and real estate transfer taxes dropped 430 million dollars. Next year's deficit is now estimated to be between $9-18 billion dollars.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/21calif.html
    LOS ANGELES — Direct democracy has once again upended California — enough so that the state may finally consider another way by overhauling its Constitution for the first time in 130 years.
    Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger returned home from a White House visit on Wednesday to find the state dangerously broke, his constituents defiant after a special election on Tuesday and calls for a constitutional convention — six months ago little more than a wonkish whisper — a cacophony.

    As the notion of California as ungovernable grows stronger than ever, Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, has expressed support for a convention to address such things as the state’s arcane budget requirements and its process for proliferate ballot initiatives, both of which necessitated Tuesday’s statewide vote on budget matters approved months ago by state lawmakers.
    Texas budget Yes[1] no shortfall[1] n/a
    State budget issues, 2009-2010 - Sunshine Review

    So there we go.

    New York, Cali, going broke.

    Texas, sitting pretty.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  10. #60
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Senate says 'no' to federal debt commission Obama endorsed

    I am *very* concerned about what this illustrates about the dysfunction of our Congress. The Senate can no longer even bring itself to appoint a commission to PROPOSE ways of reducing the deficit. The Republicans have steadfastly refused to compromise on any tax increases, and some Democrats are worried that the commission will propose entitlement cuts. How can we ever hope to get our finances under control if these suggestions are both off-limits forever?

    We need some serious reform of the legislative process itself, lest our Congress becomes as dysfunctional as the Italian Parliament. We need to either adopt Sen. Harkin's proposal to ease cloture requirements, or go back to the old Senate rules of requiring those in favor of a filibuster to actually filibuster.

    And I'm in favor of even more commissions like these in lieu of the dysfunctional manner in which Congress usually handles financial matters. If it was up to me, we'd have technocrats writing the legislation for just about all economic issues, with Congress only getting to vote yes or no.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 01-27-10 at 01:54 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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