• 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!

Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3

haymarket said:
President Obama is doing just what he should be doing in warning the American people of possible consequences of the Republican war on the working class of this nation. Sadly, he has only dipped his toe into the waters and needs to dive in completely. We can hope this happens over the next 16 months.

We need a full blown, very aggressive, very much "in your face", very much no holds barred campaign filled with statistics, fact and figures about the right wing war on the working class in America. That should be the centerpiece and focus of the campaign because everything else is just a plank in that platform.
Click to expand...



You would lose on "facts and figures"


Fact, there is higher unemployment than 4 years ago.

Fact, Your home is worth less

Fact, Gitmo is still open

Fact, Gas prices are up

Fact, he wants to raise your taxes

Fact, the debt is multitudes higher than it was 4 years ago

Fact, folks are worse off today than they were 4 years ago.


So sure you run on "facts" and "figures" and "in your face" and see how that works out for you...


here is another "fact" Obama is lying, your SS checks will go out on Aug 3rd despite the fear mongering.


:lamo
 
Kandahar said:
It's not a matter of paying our debt off; I agree that that probably won't happen.
Click to expand...

If your first paragraph wasn't irresponsible enough to make you lose credibility, that sentence drove the nail deep into the coffin of credibility. You admit we won't pay off our debts, yet in the same reply you actually think repealing the debt limit is a good idea?

I just wonder how some people's brains are wired.
 
haymarket said:
President Obama is doing just what he should be doing in warning the American people of possible consequences of the Republican war on the working class of this nation. Sadly, he has only dipped his toe into the waters and needs to dive in completely. We can hope this happens over the next 16 months.

We need a full blown, very aggressive, very much "in your face", very much no holds barred campaign filled with statistics, fact and figures about the right wing war on the working class in America. That should be the centerpiece and focus of the campaign because everything else is just a plank in that platform.
Click to expand...

"statistics, fact and figures" You're kidding right? Just look at many of the posts on this forum - people don't really care about "statistics, fact and figures", they buy what they are sold based on pre-conceived positions and opinion - I mean this part of your post about sums it all up "the right wing war on the working class in America". Are you referring to the 48% of American voters who did NOT vote for this President?
 
Kandahar said:
Same question for you: if it's just a "scare tactic," then where IS the money going to come from? I've now heard various conservatives take cuts for seniors, cuts for veterans, cuts for soldiers, and defaulting on the debt off the table. Well, you're mathematically running out of places to slash spending by the amount that would be necessary, if the debt ceiling isn't raised. So if Obama's assessment is merely scare tactics, why don't you present us with a list of where you're going to cut 43% of the budget?

(Hint: NPR and agriculture subsidies are not quite 43% of the federal budget.)
Click to expand...



So August third, there is no money? o_O


How about Obama stop holding the country hostage for his tax increases and rampant spending.
 
dontworrybehappy said:
If your first paragraph wasn't irresponsible enough to make you lose credibility, that sentence drove the nail deep into the coffin of credibility.
Click to expand...

Yeah, shame on me for agreeing with what you just said yourself in the previous post.

You admit we won't pay off our debts, yet in the same reply you actually think repealing the debt limit is a good idea?
Click to expand...

Because the debt limit doesn't actually curb the size of our debt, as I mentioned in my previous post. It's just a club that the opposition uses to embarrass the in-party and occasionally extract concessions. And normally that would be fine, except every time it happens we run the risk of someone pushing brinkmanship too far and not being able to reach an agreement to raise the debt ceiling. That's why I'm supportive of the proposal that Mitch McConnell put forward yesterday.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
So August third, there is no money? o_O
Click to expand...

Only the amount that is covered by tax revenue, rather than borrowing. Which will mean an immediate 43% cut in government spending.

How about Obama stop holding the country hostage for his tax increases and rampant spending.
Click to expand...

Come on, at least some conservatives have ATTEMPTED to answer my question (albeit all of the solutions I've seen have been unworkable, impractical, or insufficient). If it's just "scare tactics" for Obama to suggest that there might not be enough money for seniors, soldiers, veterans, AND to service the debt...then surely YOU have a list of ways where we're going to cut 43% of the budget in the next three weeks without affecting any of those programs. Or at least something in the same ballpark as 43%.
 
Last edited:
from the rev

You would lose on "facts and figures"


Fact, there is higher unemployment than 4 years ago.
Click to expand...

Well then, lets look at the first one on your list:

FACT: the rate of growth in the unemployment rate was over 400% higher under the previous president than it has been under President Obama. He has slowed the speeding unemployment freight train down mightily compared to the out of control pace of his predecessor.

That is indeed a winning fact that the American people should be informed about.

from snill -

Are you referring to the 48% of American voters who did NOT vote for this President?
Click to expand...

Actually, some of them might be participating in the war on the working class but not all or even most of them.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Yeah, shame on me for agreeing with what you just said yourself in the previous post.



Because the debt limit doesn't actually curb the size of our debt, as I mentioned in my previous post. It's just a club that the opposition uses to embarrass the in-party and occasionally extract concessions. And normally that would be fine, except every time it happens we run the risk of someone pushing brinkmanship too far and not being able to reach an agreement to raise the debt ceiling. That's why I'm supportive of the proposal that Mitch McConnell put forward yesterday.
Click to expand...

Big difference between me and you.....I vote against raising the debt ceiling, you vote in favor of repealing it altogether. What that means: I get it. You don't.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
from the rev



Well then, lets look at the first one on your list:

FACT: the rate of growth in the unemployment rate was over 400% higher under the previous president than it has been under President Obama. He has slowed the speeding unemployment freight train down mightily compared to the out of control pace of his predecessor.

That is indeed a winning fact that the American people should be informed about.
Click to expand...




Link to evidence of this?

I'll wait.

Actually, no, I won't wait, you made that up. :lamo


LNS14000000_83547_1310568721861.gif



yes Obama should run on facts and statistics. :thumbs:
 
dontworrybehappy said:
Big difference between me and you.....I vote against raising the debt ceiling, you vote in favor of repealing it altogether. What that means: I get it. You don't.
Click to expand...

Really it just means that you think the debt ceiling accomplishes something that it doesn't. Whereas I'm fully aware of the way that it ACTUALLY works. To paraphrase conservative humorist P.J. O'Rourke (talking about a different issue), the national debt is like a bathroom scale. You might not like the number that you see, but it is what it is. You can't just pass a quick-fix law to cap it. It doesn't work that way.

If we want to reduce our debt-to-GDP ratio, we'll need to look at entitlement reform, tax reform, and defense cuts to put our country on a sustainable long-term fiscal path. What doesn't work and never has is to simply declare that we're going to stop borrowing money, effective immediately.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Really it just means that you think the debt ceiling accomplishes something that it doesn't. Whereas I'm fully aware of the way that it ACTUALLY works.
Click to expand...

Your own president voted against raising the debt limit in 2006. I am in agreement with him, it should not be raised.

Case closed.
 
dontworrybehappy said:
Your own president voted against raising the debt limit in 2006. I am in agreement with him, it should not be raised.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. Everyone in Congress uses the debt ceiling as a way to bludgeon the in-party when they're in the opposition, but everyone understands the reality that it must be raised. Essentially, whichever party doesn't control the White House views the debt ceiling as "the other side's problem," and they won't provide any votes for raising it unless they have to. Therefore I suggest that we just get rid of it entirely. Bludgeoning the political opposition may or may not be important, but it's substantially less important than the danger that we could default on our debt.
 
Kandahar said:
Only the amount that is covered by tax revenue, rather than borrowing. Which will mean an immediate 43% cut in government spending.
Click to expand...

To give you an idea, thats how much the gov't would need to cut JUST TO LIVE WITHIN ITS MEANS. That's NOT saving a dime.

If you don't think spending is out of control, then you're a lost cause.

Immediate 43% spending cut? I like the sound of that! :thumbs:

You truly have no clue how the world works. Your wanting to eliminate the debt ceiling is proof of that. You already admit we can't pay our debts, if we appear irresponsible (which Obama is already seen as) financially on the world financial market, don't you think we're going to get screwed when countries realize our debt is way beyond our means to pay it off? Do you really have a clue? Honestly? I have a feeling you've never taken an economics course in college. You ever even been to college?
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
To give you an idea, thats how much the gov't would need to cut JUST TO LIVE WITHIN ITS MEANS. That's NOT saving a dime.

If you don't think spending is out of control, then you're a lost cause.
Click to expand...

I didn't say spending wasn't a problem; I said that not raising the debt ceiling is a foolish way to cut spending. We need to reform entitlements, change our tax code, and cut defense spending.

Immediate 43% spending cut? I like the sound of that! :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting a 43% cut across the board, or do you have any sacred cows like many of the other conservatives/libertarians that are off the table in any cuts? Entitlements? Defense? Debt servicing? Anything else?

You truly have no clue how the world works. Your wanting to eliminate the debt ceiling is proof of that. You already admit we can't pay our debts, if we appear irresponsible (which Obama is already seen as) financially on the world financial market, don't you think we're going to get screwed when countries realize our debt is way beyond our means to pay it off? Do you really have a clue? Honestly? I have a feeling you've never taken an economics course in college. You ever even been to college?
Click to expand...

Actually I have an MBA with a concentration in economics, so I've taken more economics than just about anyone on this board. But in any case, you are a profoundly unpleasant person to talk to, so I think I'm done with this conversation. Toodles. :2wave:
 
Kandahar said:
I didn't say spending wasn't a problem; I said that not raising the debt ceiling is a foolish way to cut spending. We need to reform entitlements, change our tax code, and cut defense spending.



Are you suggesting a 43% cut across the board, or do you have any sacred cows like many of the other conservatives/libertarians that are off the table in any cuts? Entitlements? Defense? Debt servicing? Anything else?



Actually I have an MBA with a concentration in economics, so I've taken more economics than just about anyone on this board. But in any case, you are a profoundly unpleasant person to talk to, so I think I'm done with this conversation. Toodles. :2wave:
Click to expand...

MBA? LOLOLOL :lamo

Good boy, run away while you still can. Good riddance. :2wave:
 
PzKfW IVe said:
Irrelevant. If the debt ceiling is not raised, then spending -must- be cut to match revenue.
No program, no entitlement - nothing is above being cut.
Click to expand...

Does this include our wars?
 
Ikari said:
Does this include our wars?
Click to expand...

What part of no program and no entitlement do you not understand? But remember, almost 60% of our spending is sustainable, which would probably include the cost of the wars.

I don't have confidence that the repubs will actually not raise the debt ceiling, but I hope they don't.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
What a dirtbag move by the POTUS... Scare and fear tactics...... These checks will go out, and Obama should be ashamed of himself threatening seniors and Veterans.
Click to expand...

Scare tactics are a tried and true political tactic. I mean, look at all the crap we got because the terrorists were going to get us. More government, more laws, now we can't even get through the airport without invasive screening. That **** costs money....our money.
 
Kandahar said:
We'll see how well 43% cuts on everything sit with the American people and if they actually have the stomach for that. My guess: It would be less than 24 hours into such a standoff before the Republicans caved.
Click to expand...

I agree. Its big talk when its someone elses money youre talking about. When the american people realize just how much that would affect them personally.... I dont think they would be so keen on it anymore. Of course thats really nothing new, we as a society are generally like that. Its good to do this or that...(sshhhhh...so long as it doesnt affect me)
 
dontworrybehappy said:
What part of no program and no entitlement do you not understand? But remember, almost 60% of our spending is sustainable, which would probably include the cost of the wars.

I don't have confidence that the repubs will actually not raise the debt ceiling, but I hope they don't.
Click to expand...

Well ususally when people are screaming to cut Social Security, Medicare, etc. they tend to not want to end our interventionist wars. That's why I asked the question, are our wars included in what he wanted cut. Because the wars are well more unnecessary than say Social Security.
 
BamaBrat said:
I agree. Its big talk when its someone elses money youre talking about. When the american people realize just how much that would affect them personally.... I dont think they would be so keen on it anymore. Of course thats really nothing new, we as a society are generally like that. Its good to do this or that...(sshhhhh...so long as it doesnt affect me)
Click to expand...

We're talking about saving people money. How is that bad? The american people would be affected by having a gov't at least briefly living within its means. OH MY GAWD THE WORLD WILL CEASE TO EXIST, GRANDMA WILL DIE!!!!!

I'd be real keen on it, whether I liked it or not. If I fell in love with t bone steak every night and then someone told me "hey look, you can't afford this anymore" would I like it? No. Would I live on something cheaper? Yes.

My gawd, do you have anything else to add to the conversation?
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
We're talking about saving people money. How is that bad? The american people would be affected by having a gov't at least briefly living within its means? OH MY GAWD THE WORLD WILL CEASE TO EXIST, GRANDMA WILL DIE!!
Click to expand...
That will be the battle cry.
Of course, it isn't true - but, the ends justify the means, so its OK.
 
Ikari said:
Does this include our wars?
Click to expand...
My original post to this effect postulated a 43% cut in all spending, across the board.
43% cut in SocSec
43% cut in Medicare
43% cut in defense spending
43% cut in...

Now, a 43% cut in defense spending will give the DoD a budget of about $375B (using FY2009 numbers), the allocation of which will be determined otherwise - so, that may or may not mean the end of our wars.
 
Last edited:
dontworrybehappy said:
We're talking about saving people money. How is that bad? The american people would be affected by having a gov't at least briefly living within its means. OH MY GAWD THE WORLD WILL CEASE TO EXIST, GRANDMA WILL DIE!!!!!

My gawd, do you have anything else to add to the conversation?
Click to expand...

Oh I think America should definitely live within its means. I think budgets for our country should be just like the one I have for my home...if ya dont have it, dont spend it. If ya cant pay for it... you either have to get a second job or do without. I was just commenting on his comment about the american people in general.
 
Re: August 1, 2011

Erod said:
BS.

Social security payments and the debt ceiling have nothing to do with each other.

Minnesota shut it government down weeks ago. Has it imploded yet?
Click to expand...

It will soon. Liquor licenses are not being renewed and bars and taverns are droppping like flies. It's only a matter of time until the drunks go on a rampage. LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom