http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/13/boehner-failure-t...John Boehner continues to deride Obama about "getting serious" about spending cuts, and now wants Obama to tell HIM what spending cuts should be made. This, after the initial proposal from the Republican House failed to name any specific spending cuts. Part 1: Boehner is saying, in effect, that Obama needs to name the people HE'd fire, so Boehner can attack that, instead of Boehner offering his own specific solutions. Because we know that the spending cuts Boehner has in mind would affect the middle class and the poor substantially more, if not exclusively. The answer: Don't blink, Mr. President! Don't fall for it. Parts 2-50: Increasing revenue is NOT just about closing the budget gap. It's absolutely crucial to reverse the disastrous policy of feeding the wealthy and the high-earners at the expense of everyone else, and admit that the guiding premise of that policy, that the wealthy will spend enough and hire enough to grow the economy (trickle-down/supply-side), is at best completely mistaken, and at worst an unmitigated lie, but absolutely wrong either way. In effect, taking BACK the trillions given to the so-called job creators is a way to say, "we gave you all this money because you said you'd create jobs with it, and you didn't. In fact, you did the opposite. Now we have to try and clean up the mess you made." The answer: Same as above. Speaker Boehner, the president has no obligation whatsoever to populate YOUR "spending cut" proposal, and to suggest so is almost as ridiculous as McConnell's filibustering his own bill. Telling your opponent to define your proposal for you so you can whine about what a terrible job he did in doing so is cowardly in the extreme, and is the OPPOSITE of leadership. Have the courage to show the world what you stand for, or get the hell out of the way in favor of someone who will. -n8
I agree. Whack the ball back into Bonehead's court. Let him reveal the true agenda of the far right.The more I think about it the more I come to the conclusion that spending cuts (with a few targeted exceptions) are a horrible idea.The USofA is not Luxembourg. Or Monaco. We're a HUGE country with over 300M people in it. That requires a sizable government to govern, and to maintain infrastructure. And that requires money. A lot of money. And the more services and protections we expect, the more it costs. We have to pay for what we get (either now, or later - it will cost more later!).I don't pretend to have a clue how much it takes to run a nation of this size and complexity. But I contend that our present rate of taxation is too low to do the job in a fiscally sound way (i.e. without running a large deficit). Even if we did cut back defense, and improved inefficiencies in other programs, I don't think the government of such a large country can function on the revenues this country brings in.Not that I want to pay more in taxes. I don't. But we all need to.1poorguy (ready for some cliff-diving...and realizing that most of the spending cuts will be reversed later anyway)
You've got it right. But what Obama has to do is go out there with a very simple message. he needs to tell the American people that right now he is bent on keeping middle class tax rates low, and keeping us from being destroyed with the spending limit increase. Give nothing else to the Republicans, NOTHING. Obama has the cards because screwing with the debt limit could crash the whole world economy. It is clear who is screwing with the debt limit.
We're a HUGE country with over 300M people in it. That requires a sizable government to govern, and to maintain infrastructure. And that requires money.Glad to see other people say this. It's been one of my points for years, AND that we cannot look at spending growth alone without accounting for population growth as well.But I contend that our present rate of taxation is too low to do the job in a fiscally sound wayYES YES YES YES!!!! That is what people need to hear. Currently we have cut too much revenue. We are way too low to even maintain what we have and no amount of hoped for trickle down will show up because, because corporate growth is taxed so little (or not at all <offshore, ahem>) that it can't trickle down.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |