Debate Politics Forums forum
Go Back   Debate Politics Forums > In the news > *Breaking News* - Mainstream Media



Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-26-09, 08:38 AM   #71
Moderator
Mod team member

 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Last Seen: Today 03:43 PM
Location: New York
Posts: 4,036
Thanks: 1,561
Thanked 3,048 Times in 1,621 Posts
Lean: Centrist
Gender: Male

Moderation Team:  Thank you!! 
Total Awards: 1

Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by ARealConservative View Post
only one politician ran for POTUS with an actual plan to reduce the size of the federal government.
Governor Romney spoke about reforming the nation's entitlement program and reining in entitlement spending growth during his campaign. However, all of that occurred prior to the onset of the acute phase of the ongoing economic crisis.

It should be noted that Governor Romney would likely have supported some kind of fiscal stimulus, as well. However, his stimulus package might have been more heavily weighted in the direction of tax cuts. The one issue associated with such an approach is that it would increase the structural deficit if the cuts were made permanent and those cuts would need to be offset by either closing tax loopholes/eliminating deduction (in exchange for lower rates) or cutting spending elsewhere afterward to be budget-neutral in the long-run.

Overall, once the economy has been stabilized and is again growing, the federal government should make it a priority to begin addressing its long-term fiscal imbalances. The added debt accumulated in recent years, both before and after the current economic crisis, adds to the urgency of that task.

Last edited by donsutherland1; 02-26-09 at 08:52 AM.
donsutherland1 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!Stumble this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-09, 08:54 AM   #72
cookies crumble

 
ARealConservative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Last Seen: 03-19-10 01:15 AM
Posts: 4,502
Thanks: 437
Thanked 1,074 Times in 697 Posts
Lean: Libertarian
Gender: Male
Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
Governor Romeny spoke about reforming the nation's entitlement program and reining in entitlement spending growth during his campaign. However, all of that occurred prior to the onset of the acute phase of the ongoing economic crisis.
Romney also spoke of spending federal funds to aid Michigan and showed no signs of streamlining our massive foreign expenditures (which take up the lions share of our annual budget).

I recall a report from the NTU attempting to show the overall cost of the various politicians plans - Guliani was the second closest in overall cost of programs outlined, but his still showed a net gain in expenditures.


edit - here is a link summarizing the report - I was incorrect in that Guliani also showed a net reduction

Study: Presidential Frontrunners Would Boost Budget by Range of $7 Billion to $287... | Reuters

Last edited by ARealConservative; 02-26-09 at 08:57 AM.
ARealConservative is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!Stumble this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-09, 09:58 AM   #73
Banned

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Last Seen: 11-03-09 11:18 AM
Location: Ventura California
Posts: 8,706
Thanks: 3,030
Thanked 1,410 Times in 1,091 Posts
Lean: Conservative
Gender: Male
Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post
This thread is the epitome of partisan politics and a good example of this forum. You almost never see someone place blame on the system, it's always on a particular President. The reality is that Congress spends like drunken sailors...Democrat and Republican alike. They have done so for decades. Complaining about a spending bill and trying to fix blame over the damaged economy to a specific president or party is just plain ignorant.

And 9/11 didn't cause us to spend hundreds of billions of dollars and run us into monumental debt. Irresponsible decision making and a lack of effective oversight did that. Both parties are guilty for this incredibly ****ty situation this nation is in.
What an amusing definition of Bush's spending; "monumental." Considering where we are with Democrats in charge, the highest budget deficit the Republicans ran was about $350 billion. Contrasted with over $2 TRILLION and counting being spent by Democrats, I would say you need to re-work that desperate partisan rhetoric.

Monumental would be an apt description of the current spending being proposed and passed every week by Democrats who have YET to debate how we are going to pay for it all. All the taxes on every rich person in the nation won't be enough at this pace.

What is even more amusing was the desperate partisan rhetoric we saw when Bush passed tax cuts and the Liberals railed how irresponsible that was with a looming deficit; now suddenly with a deficit hitting levels unheard of before, tax cuts make perfect sense.

You just cannot fabricate the level of willful denial, ignorance and hypocrisy it takes to be a Democrat these days.

And what is the clown like response from the Left when confronted with this irresponsible level of spending without funding? Bush did it too!
Truth Detector is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!Stumble this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Truth Detector For This Useful Post:
Old 02-26-09, 10:17 AM   #74
Constitutionalist


 
American's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Last Seen: Today 09:37 PM
Location: VA
Posts: 14,808
Thanks: 2,997
Thanked 2,961 Times in 2,055 Posts
Lean: Conservative
Gender: Male
Re: House Democrats propose $410B spending bill

Quote:
Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
Governor Romney spoke about reforming the nation's entitlement program and reining in entitlement spending growth during his campaign. However, all of that occurred prior to the onset of the acute phase of the ongoing economic crisis.

It should be noted that Governor Romney would likely have supported some kind of fiscal stimulus, as well. However, his stimulus package might have been more heavily weighted in the direction of tax cuts. The one issue associated with such an approach is that it would increase the structural deficit if the cuts were made permanent and those cuts would need to be offset by either closing tax loopholes/eliminating deduction (in exchange for lower rates) or cutting spending elsewhere afterward to be budget-neutral in the long-run.

Overall, once the economy has been stabilized and is again growing, the federal government should make it a priority to begin addressing its long-term fiscal imbalances. The added debt accumulated in recent years, both before and after the current economic crisis, adds to the urgency of that task.
I don't think reducing entitlement growth is enough. With entitlements making up about 50% of the budget, I think a lot more needs to happen. 50% is just plain insanity. Lefties always want to cut defense which IS the function of the federal government, and only about 20% of the budget; but never ever ever want to touch entitlements. Not surprising since that's their ticket to power. But letting this Great Society bloat up to 50%, and then blaming defense and deficits is idiocy IMHO.

You can't just dump loopholes in a vacuum, which is what Congress has done up to now. The entire housing economy is built on these things, and people count on them. There has to be some other incentive in plase to stimulate home ownership. Example: It's just like when they dumped the tax deduction for credit cards in the 80's and failed to reign in the credit card industry. I understand the need to reduce the dependence on credit cards, but you just don't remove the benefit to the consumer while not aiming at the credit card companies and their immoral practices. It's bad enough the the average American is not taught in public school how to survive in a capitalist society, but to put them in financial danger without changing the fundamental business of credit cards is insane. The public in general is gullible, otherwise you wouldn't receive mountains of credit card prequals in the mail each week. That practice should be outlawed because most of those deals are preditory.
__________________
"Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure." -- Thomas Jefferson יהוה
American is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Reddit!Stumble this Post!Google Bookmark this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to American For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO
Debate Politics.com Copyright ©2004-2009
no new posts