• 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!

The Obama's "Spending Freeze"

See OP

  • This is a meaningful step toward deficit reduction

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • This is a political ploy meant to dupe the vaguely aware

    Votes: 8 66.7%

  • Other...

    Votes: 4 33.3%
  • Total voters
    12
It's pointless.

It's like looking at a car bombing victim with his leg blown off and putting a band-aid on his little finger to slow the blood loss.


And telling his watching wife that you're doing everything you can and he'll be all better.
 
Goobieman said:
The Obama says this will save $250B by 2020.

US Budget: Obama to Seek 3-year Freeze on US Domestic Spending - CNBC

Do you think see this $25B/yr spending 'cut' as a meaningful step toward deficit reduction, or a political ploy meant to dupe the vaguely aware?
Or something else...?

Please be sure to explain your response
Click to expand...

Seems too early to tell so I picked "other". It could certainly be either one, but what that will depend on is if it's the first of a series of moves meant to cut the deficit, or if it's the only one that's planned.

My initial thoughts are that it's probably the latter option, but I feel that until later steps are taken or not taken, the chance exists that it might be the former.
 
Saving $250B by 2020 doesn't save us a thing when he is spending over $700B in stimulus and many more billions on other bills he has passed and wants to pass. If he truly wanted to help this country and the deficit he would repeal stimulus spending, stop pushing for expensive legislation, and stop raising taxes and damaging business. The debt doesn't have to increase at all if we simply stopped spending beyond what we have. The government needs to live within its means like individuals are expected to do.
 
Can't it be both?

It's certainly based in an attempt to capture the populist mood in the country, but that doesn't mean it's not also meaningful or substantial.

By no means is it a solution to our deficit problems, but it's not nothing. Look at it this way:

If Obama came out tomorrow and proposed a bill that would spend $250,000,000,000 over the next 10 years on doing [something that you don't like], would you consider it a big deal?
 
RightinNYC said:
Can't it be both?
Click to expand...
A meaningful political ploy?
:)
I think the facts of the issue peak for themselves -- a $25B/yr average reduction in spending compares to a ~$1.7T deficit is meaningless.

If Obama came out tomorrow and proposed a bill that would spend $250,000,000,000 over the next 10 years on doing [something that you don't like], would you consider it a big deal?[/B]
Click to expand...
I guess that depends on the particulars and the amount already being spent. I -would- say that if He wanted to 'solve a funding problem' by increasing spending $25B/yr on a program that already sees ~1.7T per year, that said increase is meaningless.
 
Goobieman said:
A meaningful political ploy?
:)
I think the facts of the issue peak for themselves -- a $25B/yr average reduction in spending compares to a ~$1.7T deficit is meaningless.


I guess that depends on the particulars and the amount already being spent. I -would- say that if He wanted to 'solve a funding problem' by increasing spending $25B/yr on a program that already sees ~1.7T per year, that said increase is meaningless.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about it as compared to his other proposals, I'm talking about whether or not the proposal itself is a good idea.

Do you think a proposal to cut $250b in spending is a good idea?
 
RightinNYC said:
I'm not talking about it as compared to his other proposals, I'm talking about whether or not the proposal itself is a good idea.
Do you think a proposal to cut $250b in spending is a good idea?
Click to expand...
I -am- talking about it in comparison to other proposals, because that's the only way it can have any meaning.

Is 250,000,000,000 a big number? To answer that question, you have to have something to compare it to.

If you were to cut federal spending by $25B/yr back in 1920, it -would- be a huge cut.

But, to answer -your- question
Yes, we have to start someplace.
BUT while we DO have to start somewhere, to try to pass this off as anything of significance in an insult to the intelligence of the American people.
 
Last edited:
Goobieman said:
I -am- talking about it in comparison to other proposals, because that's the only way it can have any meaning.

Is 250,000,000,000 a big number? To answer that question, you have to have something to compare it to.

If you were to cut federal spending by $25B/yr back in 1920, it -would- be a huge cut.

But, to answer -your- question
Yes, we have to star someplace.
BUT while we DO have to start somewhere, to try to pass this off as anything of significance in an insult to the intelligence of the American people.
Click to expand...

So when the Democrats proposed a $900b health care bill over 10 years, you had no issue with that spending? You thought a $250b TARP program was nothing at all? I mean, compared to the national debt, those amounts are barely anything.
 
RightinNYC said:
So when the Democrats proposed a $900b health care bill over 10 years, you had no issue with that spending? You thought a $250b TARP program was nothing at all? I mean, compared to the national debt, those amounts are barely anything.
Click to expand...
Not sure how those comparisons are relevant the issue I presented...?

My opposition to that spending was based on the isue itself, not the amount it added to the debt, and so the "it only added $25B/yr to the dent" eas never an issue for me.

BUT what we have here is something -designed- to reduce the deficit -- and to the point that it does, that's fine, but to somehow say thst this is a significant, meaningful effort to that end, is farcical.
 
Last edited:
$250BB isn't chickenfeed. But it IS $250BB after a massive expansion of spending, much larger than $250BB. It's certainly better than nothing. But there's still a long, long way to go.

It does concede the ground to those of us which to curtail spending, though. Now, it's about if, but how much. More, please. Much more.
 
Harshaw said:
$250BB isn't chickenfeed. But it IS $250BB after a massive expansion of spending, much larger than $250BB. It's certainly better than nothing. But there's still a long, long way to go.

It does concede the ground to those of us which to curtail spending, though. Now, it's about if, but how much. More, please. Much more.
Click to expand...

Yup..... we're going to freeze Government spending. Except,

National security issues,

Social Security,

Medicare,

Medicaid,

Foreign affairs,

Healthcare,

Stimulus,

Job creation.

Yup, I really mean it!... He's all about Fiscal Responsibility. :roll:

:2wave:
 
Harshaw said:
$250BB isn't chickenfeed. But it IS $250BB after a massive expansion of spending, much larger than $250BB. It's certainly better than nothing. But there's still a long, long way to go.

It does concede the ground to those of us which to curtail spending, though. Now, it's about if, but how much. More, please. Much more.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say "concede". More like "concede a minor battle, but not the war."

In terms of spending decreases, it's like we just took one step forward after sliding six steps back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom