• 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!

Reid rejects Boehner proposal for $2 trillion in spending cuts

Mayor Snorkum said:
Reid has a point. A more fair apportionment of taxes should be done. There's far too many people who don't pay taxes, and the tax code should be written to make the lower classes pay more of their fair share.

As for the rest, Reid is, of course, wrong. Because the budget deficit is a spending defect, it won't be fixed unless spending is reined in.
Click to expand...

When they show they will stop spending they will see the money goes farther
 
Boehner is more than willing to negotiate. He only says he won't raise taxes. Reid can counter easily with fine - and we also won't reform entitlements. That's a position that achieves democrat desires to protect those programs from any reductions, while still leaving room in the middle to raise the debt ceiling.

as for a 'more fair apportionment of tax policy in this country' - if he was talking about getting the 6 out of 10 households who get more from the federal government than they pay in taxes to begin paying something close to their 'fair share', if he was talking about making sure that all americans paid some share.... then i would buy it. but he doesn't, he just means that the people that already pay their share, pay others' shares, and then pay those others a little something extra off the top need to be squeezed even harder.
 
randel said:
Reid was absolutely correct in rejecting Boehner's demands...Boehner wants to dictate how this will play out, instead of negotiating...isnt going to happen. where was all this interest to balance the budget in the Bush years?
Click to expand...

Reid has no leg to stand on. He has not cut any spending in the last 2 years
 
cpwill said:
Boehner is more than willing to negotiate. He only says he won't raise taxes. Reid can counter easily with fine - and we also won't reform entitlements. That's a position that achieves democrat desires to protect those programs from any reductions, while still leaving room in the middle to raise the debt ceiling.

as for a 'more fair apportionment of tax policy in this country' - if he was talking about getting the 6 out of 10 households who get more from the federal government than they pay in taxes to begin paying something close to their 'fair share', if he was talking about making sure that all americans paid some share.... then i would buy it. but he doesn't, he just means that the people that already pay their share, pay others' shares, and then pay those others a little something extra off the top need to be squeezed even harder.
Click to expand...
no my friend, that is called dictating terms...he wants something from Reid, he is going to have to give something, and i suspect that that will be some tax increases, which i know Boehner will throw a fit over, but i suspect he will give in to a tax increase of some kind...as for Reid, yeah, there will have to be some definite cutting. there is room here for both sides to work, but you can't sit down and straight up say something isnt going to happen....neither side seriously wasnts the U.S. to default, they may play chicken right up to hours before the deadline, but i suspect a deal will get done... i don't think it will be anywhere near the what was it 2 trill? that boehner was looking for....
 
ptif219 said:
Reid has no leg to stand on. He has not cut any spending in the last 2 years
Click to expand...
and how much did republicans cut lately? the problem is both sides.
 
randel said:
and how much did republicans cut lately? the problem is both sides.
Click to expand...

No the democrats have had the majority since 2007. They had a supermajority the first 2 years of Obama presidency. So it is the democrats that have spent,spent,spent with no sign of slowing down.
 
americans see one party eager to CUT

the other is dragging its feet and dithering

in washington, that is

today

out across the country, americans see people like cuomo, christie, moonbeam, quinn, deleo, etc, not so much leading as bowing to the inevitable

it is what it is

if something isn't done now to fundamentally reform our budgets our big 3 federal programs, as well as state pensions, will simply not exist in their present forms for our next generation

and yet kent conrad, two years later, still can't write up a budget

why?
 
randel said:
no my friend, that is called dictating terms
Click to expand...

no, it's dictating a border. the terms are the deal. Reid has every right to dictate a border himself - and if we are to believe the stories coming out of the collapse of the Gang of Six - that is probably what Democrats are doing.

he wants something from Reid, he is going to have to give something
Click to expand...

and Reid could have easily said fine we won't reform entitlements, either, and they would have gone from there to cut spending from the non-entitlement budget in order to increase the debt ceiling.

and i suspect that that will be some tax increases, which i know Boehner will throw a fit over, but i suspect he will give in to a tax increase of some kind...
Click to expand...

i sincerely doubt it. Boehner here has the stronger hand - the numbers vary a bit by poll, but at the very least a strong plurality of Americans oppose raising the debt ceiling at all, and some polling even indicates that as much as 43% of Democrats oppose such a move. Any debt - ceiling increase that isn't matched with large spending cuts will be rejected by the American people as spending-as-usual, and will absolutely infuriate the Republicans. Boehner already had to face down a near rebellion over his "100 billion, 60 Billion, 30 billion, 500 million" in "cuts" that he negotiated for what was left of the 2011 budget - if he walks out of there with tax hikes in a debt ceiling rise, he could very easily lose his speakership and/or spawn a third party capable of bleeding off enough support to destroy Republicans in 2012.

as for Reid, yeah, there will have to be some definite cutting. there is room here for both sides to work, but you can't sit down and straight up say something isnt going to happen....neither side seriously wasnts the U.S. to default, they may play chicken right up to hours before the deadline, but i suspect a deal will get done... i don't think it will be anywhere near the what was it 2 trill? that boehner was looking for....
Click to expand...

boehner suggested 2 trillion. but generally speaking Republicans are open to cutting any amount... and they will vote to raise the debt ceiling by precisely that. If Democrats want to become the "party of debt ceiling increases" by doing it in $250 billion chunks, that's their call.
 
cpwill said:
no, it's dictating a border. the terms are the deal. Reid has every right to dictate a border himself - and if we are to believe the stories coming out of the collapse of the Gang of Six - that is probably what Democrats are doing.



and Reid could have easily said fine we won't reform entitlements, either, and they would have gone from there to cut spending from the non-entitlement budget in order to increase the debt ceiling.



i sincerely doubt it. Boehner here has the stronger hand - the numbers vary a bit by poll, but at the very least a strong plurality of Americans oppose raising the debt ceiling at all, and some polling even indicates that as much as 43% of Democrats oppose such a move. Any debt - ceiling increase that isn't matched with large spending cuts will be rejected by the American people as spending-as-usual, and will absolutely infuriate the Republicans. Boehner already had to face down a near rebellion over his "100 billion, 60 Billion, 30 billion, 500 million" in "cuts" that he negotiated for what was left of the 2011 budget - if he walks out of there with tax hikes in a debt ceiling rise, he could very easily lose his speakership and/or spawn a third party capable of bleeding off enough support to destroy Republicans in 2012.



boehner suggested 2 trillion. but generally speaking Republicans are open to cutting any amount... and they will vote to raise the debt ceiling by precisely that. If Democrats want to become the "party of debt ceiling increases" by doing it in $250 billion chunks, that's their call.
Click to expand...
still disagree with you....he is dictating that the democrats will cut what he wants cut, or no debt ceiling increase...as for a stronger hand, no, he doesnt...boehner is playing with a busted flush, maybe if during the bush administration republicans were serious about cutting the budget, the whole budget, including the parts they are fond of, i might think this is something more than political grandstanding on the republicans part...boehner is talking a good game, but if you are going to talk the talk, you better be able to walk the walk. boehner hasnt, and i don't believe he has any intention of doing it....this is nothing more than a show a year and a half out from the presidential election.

i propose freezing the budget at 2011 levels, and then doing 3 percent across the board cuts over the next 5 years...everything gets cut, everyone feels the pain. i don't disagree with you on the fact that cuts need to be made, but boehner wants to take a hacksaw to a problem that requires a scalpel.

i would also raise the tax rates back to clinton era levels.
 
Last edited:
randel said:
still disagree with you....he is dictating that the democrats will cut what he wants cut, or no debt ceiling increase...as for a stronger hand, no, he doesnt...boehner is playing with a busted flush, maybe if during the bush administration republicans were serious about cutting the budget, the whole budget, including the parts they are fond of, i might think this is something more than political grandstanding on the republicans part...boehner is talking a good game, but if you are going to talk the talk, you better be able to walk the walk. boehner hasnt, and i don't believe he has any intention of doing it....this is nothing more than a show a year and a half out from the presidential election.

i propose freezing the budget at 2011 levels, and then doing 3 percent across the board cuts over the next 5 years...everything gets cut, everyone feels the pain. i don't disagree with you on the fact that cuts need to be made, but boehner wants to take a hacksaw to a problem that requires a scalpel.
Click to expand...

When busted blame it on Bush....Obama has spent more in 2 years than Bush could have ever dreamed of spending.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
When busted blame it on Bush....Obama has spent more in 2 years than Bush could have ever dreamed of spending.

j-mac
Click to expand...
cp and myself are having a decent conversation, do you have anything to add?
 
randel said:
cp and myself are having a decent conversation, do you have anything to add?
Click to expand...

I realize you don't want to respond to irrefutable fact, but if you think that this OPEN thread is your own forum then I might suggest you use the PM function, if not answer the post or sit down.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
I realize you don't want to respond to irrefutable fact, but if you think that this OPEN thread is your own forum then I might suggest you use the PM function, if not answer the post or sit down.


j-mac
Click to expand...
put down your talking points, turn off hannity/limbaugh/levin/savage/whoever, and if you want to join the conversation, that is fine, but address the base of the post, and quit cherry picking. either add something to the thread, or move along.
 
randel said:
put down your talking points, turn off hannity/limbaugh/levin/savage/whoever, and if you want to join the conversation, that is fine, but address the base of the post, and quit cherry picking. either add something to the thread, or move along.
Click to expand...

maybe you forgot, randel, just like you are no longer passing your self off as a conservative, you are no moderater either, so I'll add what ever the hell I want to the discussion.

Now, there is 14TRILLION plus in debt, and Obama's portion of that is 5TRILLION so speak to that or adjust your lying post.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
maybe you forgot, randel, just like you are no longer passing your self off as a conservative, you are no moderater either, so I'll add what ever the hell I want to the discussion.

Now, there is 14TRILLION plus in debt, and Obama's portion of that is 5TRILLION so speak to that or adjust your lying post.

j-mac
Click to expand...
lying post.....exactly what did you consider to be my 'lying'? me thinks you have a case of selective outrage...anyhoo...whether you continue to post or not in the thread or not, i'll just disregard you, and converse with those interested in a civil discussion...
 
randel said:
still disagree with you....he is dictating that the democrats will cut what he wants cut
Click to expand...

not really. he is saying that everything is on the table as far as cuts are concerned. the only thing we aren't going to do is not increase taxes. As far as what the Democrats want to cut - as he said, it's all on the table.

or no debt ceiling increase
Click to expand...

the debt ceiling will be increased - it becomes a question of when, and if the Government has to cut any current spending before it get's passed.

as for a stronger hand, no, he doesnt
Click to expand...

really? when almost half of democrats support him?

:lol: yeah, i'm sure that he's quaking in his boots with the possibility that he might have to take the position that the American people (and especially voters) support against a position that they don't. The worst possible position for him right now is for Republicans to become the party of fiscal responsibility while Democrats become the party dedicated to Ever More Debt.

boehner is playing with a busted flush, maybe if during the bush administration republicans were serious about cutting the budget, the whole budget, including the parts they are fond of, i might think this is something more than political grandstanding on the republicans part...boehner is talking a good game, but if you are going to talk the talk, you better be able to walk the walk. boehner hasnt, and i don't believe he has any intention of doing it....this is nothing more than a show a year and a half out from the presidential election.
Click to expand...

let me see if i have this straight.

I say that Boehner has a stronger hand because the public is solidly on his side, if not a little to his right.

and you counter with no he doesn't because the last time the Republicans held the House (in 2006), under a different speaker, they had a budget deficit...

...when in fact the Republicans history of supporting budget deficits pushes Boehner to the right, as he less room to bring that aforementioned American people into a compromise.

Not only does he not want to increase taxes. He can't increase taxes.

i propose freezing the budget at 2011 levels
Click to expand...

:lol: yeah okay, after the spikes of the past few years we will freeze and then reduce.


and then doing 3 percent across the board cuts over the next 5 years...everything gets cut, everyone feels the pain. i don't disagree with you on the fact that cuts need to be made, but boehner wants to take a hacksaw to a problem that requires a scalpel.
Click to expand...

here you are incorrect. we are talking about fully 40% of the budget that is borrowed - and costs are set to explode even as our debt is already approaching unsustainable levels. You don't need a scalpel, and you don't even want a hacksaw.

you need this:

world%27s%20biggest%20chainsaw.jpg


i would also raise the tax rates back to clinton era levels.
Click to expand...

but of course you would. fortunately for the economy, that's not on the table :)
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
not really. he is saying that everything is on the table as far as cuts are concerned. the only thing we aren't going to do is not increase taxes. As far as what the Democrats want to cut - as he said, it's all on the table.



the debt ceiling will be increased - it becomes a question of when, and if the Government has to cut any current spending before it get's passed.



really? when almost half of democrats support him?

:lol: yeah, i'm sure that he's quaking in his boots with the possibility that he might have to take the position that the American people (and especially voters) support against a position that they don't. The worst possible position for him right now is for Republicans to become the party of fiscal responsibility while Democrats become the party dedicated to Ever More Debt.



let me see if i have this straight.

I say that Boehner has a stronger hand because the public is solidly on his side, if not a little to his right.

and you counter with no he doesn't because the last time the Republicans held the House (in 2006), under a different speaker, they had a budget deficit...

...when in fact the Republicans history of supporting budget deficits pushes Boehner to the right, as he less room to bring that aforementioned American people into a compromise.

Not only does he not want to increase taxes. He can't increase taxes.



:lol: yeah okay, after the spikes of the past few years we will freeze and then reduce.




here you are incorrect. we are talking about fully 40% of the budget that is borrowed - and costs are set to explode even as our debt is already approaching unsustainable levels. You don't need a scalpel, and you don't even want a hacksaw.

you need this:

world%27s%20biggest%20chainsaw.jpg




but of course you would. fortunately, that's not on the table :)
Click to expand...
trust me my friend, the tax increase will most definitely be on the table...do you agree or disagree with what i propose, as far as the cuts? hell, i'd be willing to move it back to 2008 levels and freeze the budget there, and do the 3 percent across the board cuts...watcha think? i do honestly believe that if boehner has gotten a sudden case of religion when it comes to balancing the budget, he will have to give a bit on the tax increase side of things. as i said, their is room to work, and neither side can't come in and issue 'we won't raise taxes' or 'we won't cut entitlments' statements, both will have to give to get.
 
randel said:
trust me my friend, the tax increase will most definitely be on the table...
Click to expand...

well we'll see. but if that happens, Speaker Boehner will lose his job. And he knows that.

do you agree or disagree with what i propose, as far as the cuts? hell, i'd be willing to move it back to 2008 levels and freeze the budget there, and do the 3 percent across the board cuts...watcha think?
Click to expand...

2008 minus the idiotic bush stimulus and tarp? I would take that in return for the debt ceiling increase, probably.

i do honestly believe that if boehner has gotten a sudden case of religion when it comes to balancing the budget
Click to expand...

he hasn't. He's gotten a big cup of Tea. :)

he will have to give a bit on the tax increase side of things.
Click to expand...

given that that would depress what little recovery we are seeing, and thus increase the deficit, i rather doubt it.

as i said, their is room to work, and neither side can't come in and issue 'we won't raise taxes' or 'we won't cut entitlments' statements, both will have to give to get.
Click to expand...

for the debt increase? nah, there is enough room to play with for something of that size.

the Budget will definitely include entitlement reform.
 
cpwill said:
well we'll see. but if that happens, Speaker Boehner will lose his job. And he knows that.



2008 minus the idiotic bush stimulus and tarp? I would take that in return for the debt ceiling increase, probably.



he hasn't. He's gotten a big cup of Tea. :)



given that that would depress what little recovery we are seeing, and thus increase the deficit, i rather doubt it.



for the debt increase? nah, there is enough room to play with for something of that size.

the Budget will definitely include entitlement reform.
Click to expand...
i don't believe the 'tea party' will last much longer than the next election cycle...it is a wholly owned republican subsidiary, and those folks will return to the gop tent.
 
The Tea Party probably won't last much longer as an independent power, that is true - it has invaded the Republican Party and done a good job (so far) of taking over. But they actually won the battle within their relative party.

now, the anti-war movement.... those guys.... we are still in Iraq, Afghanistan, and we are now in Libya and stepping up attacks in Pakistan.... and I can't seem to find those guys anywhere.

but that's why Boehner won't (can't) accept tax increases. Only the release of the Ryan Budget protected him from a stronger revolt over the 2011 Budget Deal. He walks out of there "reducing the deficit" with tax increases and he is toast.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
The Tea Party probably won't last much longer as an independent power, that is true - it has invaded the Republican Party and done a good job (so far) of taking over. But they actually won the battle within their relative party.

now, the anti-war movement.... those guys.... we are still in Iraq, Afghanistan, and we are now in Libya and stepping up attacks in Pakistan.... and I can't seem to find those guys anywhere.

but that's why Boehner won't (can't) accept tax increases. Only the release of the Ryan Budget protected him from a stronger revolt over the 2011 Budget Deal. He walks out of there "reducing the deficit" with tax increases and he is toast.
Click to expand...

I think the 2011 budget deal dealt a deathblow to the republican party for 2012. They proved to be an Obama-lite party. Now fiscal conservatives have nowhere to go. It will be interesting to see voter participation in the 2012 elections. True liberals can not feel good about voting for Obama other than the fact that he is a minority. True fiscal conservatives can't feel good about voting for the whilte bread republicans who want deficits just for different spending ( defense versus social safety net).

Hard to call this a democracy when most people wind up voting for the lesser of two evils.
 
washunut said:
I think the 2011 budget deal dealt a deathblow to the republican party for 2012. They proved to be an Obama-lite party. Now fiscal conservatives have nowhere to go. It will be interesting to see voter participation in the 2012 elections. True liberals can not feel good about voting for Obama other than the fact that he is a minority. True fiscal conservatives can't feel good about voting for the whilte bread republicans who want deficits just for different spending ( defense versus social safety net).

Hard to call this a democracy when most people wind up voting for the lesser of two evils.
Click to expand...

aaaaaaaaaand I'm thinking you are screwing with us :)


but generally this sentiment:

I think the 2011 budget deal dealt a deathblow to the republican party for 2012. They proved to be an Obama-lite party. Now fiscal conservatives have nowhere to go. It will be interesting to see voter participation in the 2012 elections.
Click to expand...

is a real threat to Republicans. If they aren't on their Mostest Bestest Behavior between now and 2012 they are screwed.

:) yay for holding politicians feet to the fire!
 
now, how can taxes be on the table when kent conrad can't even write one down on a piece of paper

why did obama and his lame duck extend the bush/obama/clinton/boehner/mcconnell cuts a few hours short of new years eve in the first place

there will be no tax hikes

there will be cuomo-like cuts

as well as structural reform of entitlements

stay up
 
Last edited:
washunut said:
Now fiscal conservatives have nowhere to go.
Click to expand...

with all due respect (which is significant in your case), you underestimate the level of anti obama animus, in my opinion

keep up the good work
 
cpwill said:
aaaaaaaaaand I'm thinking you are screwing with us :)


but generally this sentiment:



is a real threat to Republicans. If they aren't on their Mostest Bestest Behavior between now and 2012 they are screwed.

:) yay for holding politicians feet to the fire!
Click to expand...

You say that now but the incumbent victory rate will still be 85% or higher...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom