Pelosi is the only person who, too often, has stood between your grandma and grandpa living in abject poverty and living a half-way confortable life. Hurray for her and her decency.
Or are you like the right wing nazis who want life to end at 65 since they are no long productive and do not contribute to the capitalistic system?
I think Pelosi has done a great job, and hope she can change her mind and pass the $4T in cuts in the next 6 weeks before the end of 2010. The country really needs those cuts now. I doubt if anything will get done in 2011 with the obstructionist mentality of the GOP in Congress.
Obama's stimulus was a gamble that saved us from a depression but failed to boot the economy and end the 25% effective national unemployment rut we are in. I feel it is time to end the stimulus and move to ONLY funding massive R&D Project only. Public works projects should now only be funded with tax money on hand, with no borrowing, no deficit spending, nor bonds floated.
Like President Roosevelt's term as President, the Feds should today only fund decades long, long term projects which create entirely new technologies and industries such as Green Tech, Automated Vehicle Highway, National Bullet Train, Fuel Cell, Zero-Emissions Vehicle Charging Stations, etc.
Night Runner wrote:
Or are you like the right wing nazis who want life to end at 65 since they are no long productive and do not contribute to the capitalistic system?
You do realize the the Healthcare bill that Pelosi crammed through had some pretty significant cuts in Medicare, right? How is that helping Senior Citizens? Don't play the us vs. them game, you sound like a political hack and a child.
Night Runner wrote:
Pelosi is the only person who, too often, has stood between your grandma and grandpa living in abject poverty and living a half-way confortable life. Hurray for her and her decency.
Or are you like the right wing nazis who want life to end at 65 since they are no long productive and do not contribute to the capitalistic system?
By the time someone is 65, they should have amassed enough money that they don't need to worry about their healthcare or well-being.
it's about time they start cutting. i'm sick of having to foot the bill for trips to dubai.
Couple of thoughts in general:
The comment that corporation should not have to pay taxes so they can invest the savings is flawed on two points:
1. Corporations use public goods (roads, education, etc.) that they should contribute to the funding of. Frankly it is in their best interest that such public goods are state-of-the-art so they compete globally.
2. Most current corporate investment is occuring in emerging markets, not the US. Corporate tax savings will help develop emerging markets more than the US.
I love the idea that we should increase the retirement age for social security. Lets make old people work longer in jobs that unemployed young people could have. I guess we like paying unemployment benefits more than social security benefits.
Obama is the biggest joke we've ever had for a president. First he shoves a trillion dollar health care bill down our throats and then sets up a commission to reduce the deficit. WTF?
Isn't it a bit unfair to accuse someone of playing "us vs. them" when in fact that has been THE GOP play for years? Remember George "you're with us or against us" Bush?
Isn't it a bit unfair that some of the other posters mention "Obamas wars against Islam"? I don't recall those wars starting after 2008.
What's really unfair is all those poor Tea Baggers who got manipulated into voting for the GOP to protect their guns, and their "free speech" and the health of the country are now going to watch their MI deduction go away and their retirement age rise. But at least the country will be safe for tax breaks for the rich.
What's really funny... putting the $2 million spent on NPR on that list. Talk about pandering to the right. $2 million dollars in savings is nothing. Trying to silence your critics... priceless.
Uncle Pervy wrote:
What's really funny... putting the $2 million spent on NPR on that list. Talk about pandering to the right. $2 million dollars in savings is nothing. Trying to silence your critics... priceless.
Okay if 2 mil is nothing then NPR doesn't need it. Let Soros pick up the tab. They're only another wing of the f***ed up left anyway.
I'm fine with that... I think cutting $2 million in federal spending will result in $4 million in donations.
And just because they report things you don't hear on Fox, doesn't mean they're part of the left. Just because you don't agree... doesn't mean it's not true.
Uuuh, who cares? No one listens to NPR anyway.
And just because you'll likely deny you're a scum sucking bottom dweller doesn't mean it's not true
this sort of report is what will test this country - are we adults are just kids playing with a country. Can we have actual discussions about entitlements and defense or will the politicians pander and the people just lap it up.
Ohhh.. good come back. Two responses, both with insults and no facts. You must be really smart. Political parties love easily manipulated dolts like yourself.
agip wrote:
this sort of report is what will test this country - are we adults are just kids playing with a country. Can we have actual discussions about entitlements and defense or will the politicians pander and the people just lap it up.
Agreed... so far, I've seen nothing that even hints that anything will get done. Tax rates will go down, spending will be cut a bit... but I'm guessing we'll leave it to our kids to try and clean up the mess.
Uncle Pervy wrote:
I'm fine with that... I think cutting $2 million in federal spending will result in $4 million in donations.
And just because they report things you don't hear on Fox, doesn't mean they're part of the left. Just because you don't agree... doesn't mean it's not true.
I personally am against public funding of radio or TV programs. There are plenty of options. My guess is that NPR (and PBS too for that matter) are perfectly commercially viable. If not, there are plenty of other outlets that are.
people should read the article, part of the deficit reduction would be tax inreases
I love how liberals claim they're worried about the deficit as an excuse to raise taxes. Truth is they dont give a shit about the deficit or the debt. They want more tax $$$ to spend more on votes.
jjjjjjjjj wrote:
why would the economy collapse if u.s. gov't debt does not fall by trillions? we are nowhere near debt problems, and it would only exacerbate the debt issues by cutting government spending now, when the recovery is precarious. If we were near debt problems, then we would see a flight from the dollar and high interest/inflation. We see none of that.
Just a couple comments here:
1) To answer your question, it could collapse because for the government to keep up service on its ever-increasing debt it will be forced to either raise rates or substantially inflate the money supply. Neither of these things is good for the long-term viability of the economy. The only other option is to default on its debt, and that's really bad for reasons that we don't even need to discuss.
2) We're nowhere near debt problems? We're in so much debt trouble that it is mathematically impossible for us to get out of it. A Boston University economics professor recently calculated that the US government is now facing a $202 trillion fiscal gap when all unfunded liabilities and obligations are considered. That doesn't sound like trouble to you? In a country with a GDP of $13 trillion? Sounds like a problem to me.
3) We ARE seeing a flight from the dollar. Have you seen any of the dollar indices lately? The dollar has been falling for some time, and the recently announced QE2 caused it to drop substantially over the past week. There is little faith in the dollar anymore.
4) I don't know how many times I have to say this, but CPI is NOT, I repeat NOT a real measure of inflation. The CPI is possibly the most bogus, manipulated number that our government publishes (and they publish a lot of bogus, manipulated numbers). CPI does not take into account many of the things that we all use regularly. The methodology for calculating CPI has changed so many times over the years that it now bears almost no resemblance to the indicator that it once was. The latest CPI figure came in at 1.1%. However, if you were to use the methodology that the government used in 1980, you'd get a number closer to 8%. The government massages the CPI so that it tells whatever story they want it to tell. The following data should help make my point.
These are the year-over-year increases in price of some commonly used commodities:
Wheat 74%
Corn 14%
Oats 68%
Canola 36%
Heating Oil 29%
Gasoline 25%
Natural Gas 15%
Beef 18%
Pork 60%
Coffee 27%
Sugar 44%
Cotton 66%
Copper 37%
Now you tell me, if these commodities have increased so much in price, how does an inflation figure of 1.1% make any logical sense unless it's heavily manipulated?
Whether you want to believe it or not, there is trouble ahead. I think that this proposal is a step in the right direction. I have my own fears that many of the cuts will never happen because it would be political suicide for many Congressmen, but at least they're finally willing to look at making some cuts in areas that used to be off limits. I'm very interested in seeing how this plays out.
I sort of misspoke in my first statement. I don't mean to say that higher interest rates are necessarily bad for the economy, just that raising interest rates will often have the effect of slowing down economic growth, at least for a period of time. Right now higher rates would probably be more healthy because they would better represent reality.