First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#1 Dec 4, 2012
What is your BALANCED approach to the Fiscal (Slope) Cliff?
Angus McGee

Chambersburg, PA

#2 Dec 4, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
What is your BALANCED approach to the Fiscal (Slope) Cliff?
A good set of skis
Dan the Man

Burnt Cabins, PA

#3 Dec 4, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
What is your BALANCED approach to the Fiscal (Slope) Cliff?
Please define 'BALANCED.'

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#4 Dec 5, 2012
I believe we are all capable of defining Balanced.

But:

bal·anced/ˈbæl&#8 201;ənst/ adjective
1. being in harmonious or proper arrangement or adjustment, proportion, etc.

emphasis for this discussion on proportion.
Dan the Man

Burnt Cabins, PA

#5 Dec 5, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
I believe we are all capable of defining Balanced.
But:
bal·anced/ˈbæl&#8 201;ənst/ adjective
1. being in harmonious or proper arrangement or adjustment, proportion, etc.
emphasis for this discussion on proportion.
Yes, of course we can all define the word 'balanced."

Balanced - fair, equitable, just

The question, as you know, is how YOU define 'balanced' in relation to the so-called "fiscal cliff." Because, frankly, I don't believe your idea of 'balanced' on this issue would be what I consider fair, equitable, or just.

If you are genuinely interested in a discussion on this issue, why don't you start one instead of inviting others to put their ideas out there for you to criticize?

What is it with you conservatives - insisting that others put forward their proposals for critique without offering a proposal of your own? From the US Congress all the way down to Topix, that's your pattern.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#6 Dec 5, 2012
I just started a conversation, I'm not as quick to criticize as others.

Taxes on all Go up.

Cut spending equally (including defense) across the board.
DGS

Thurmont, MD

#7 Dec 5, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
I just started a conversation, I'm not as quick to criticize as others.
Taxes on all Go up.
Cut spending equally (including defense) across the board.
You are exactly right General. Everyone must bear the brunt of this responsibility. Taxes being raised on the wealthiest alone will not do it. We must ALL pay more. Our social security system and medicare system are far to generous to the elderly of this country. Our military spending is far too wasteful. Our fighting forces must be made to be leaner and more mobile. Although there are problems with the program, drones must be perfected and utilized when possible, from both a life and money saving aspect.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#8 Dec 5, 2012
Our entitlements systems are not necessarily "to generous" they are just exploited, by congress and frauds. Reform them.
Dan the Man

Chambersburg, PA

#9 Dec 5, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
I just started a conversation, I'm not as quick to criticize as others.
Taxes on all Go up.
Cut spending equally (including defense) across the board.
That's what we're going to get if we do nothing, isn't it? That's the "fiscal cliff."
Dan the Man

Chambersburg, PA

#10 Dec 5, 2012
Making deficit reduction the over-riding goal during a weak economy is counter-productive. The "fiscal cliff" is overly aggressive deficit reduction, and economists from across the political spectrum agree that it would damage our economy and likely cause another recession.

The world is borrowing from the US at interest rates that are lower than inflation. They are essentially paying US to lend us money. There is no better time than now borrow and invest in the types of projects that will strengthen the economy and grow jobs.

As the economy strengthens and GDP grows, the deficit will automatically shrink. As GDP grows, the debt as a percentage of GDP will go down.

And as those things happen, THEN is the time to begin paying down the debt. That was Bill Clinton's successful strategy - balance the budget and begin paying down the debt during STRONG economic times.

Doing it while the economy is weak is a recipe for disaster. Focusing on deficit reduction by taxing the still struggling middle class and cutting spending now while the economy is still weak is the path Europe has taken.

While the GOP shrieks that the US is headed the way of Greece, the truth is that implementing the GOP plan actually IS the path to an economy like Greece's.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#11 Dec 5, 2012
Churchill stated: "We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."

We have all seen that as Revenues increase the Government then turns around and spends it on pet projects.(Think Solyndra)

Cut spending and raise taxes in a balanced way.

The tax rates do not have to go back to Clinton era rates. That would indeed be crippling.
Dan the Man

Chambersburg, PA

#12 Dec 5, 2012
It occurs to me - the GOP is saying that Obama's plan isn't serious because it doesn't cut Medicare spending enough.

But wasn't one of their primary campaign themes angry outrage that Obama had cut $700 billion from Medicare and that Romney would restore it?

Which is it, wingers - did he already cut Medicare too much or isn't he cutting Medicare enough? You can't have it both ways.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#13 Dec 5, 2012
Medicare is only one component of this discussion. One that both parties likes to use as a weapon, to try to scare the other side, that is unfortunate. The program is outdated and needs reform. If that reform requires additional monies, than so be it; if if saves money that can be used better in other places GREAT!!
Dan the Man

Burnt Cabins, PA

#14 Dec 5, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
Medicare is only one component of this discussion. One that both parties likes to use as a weapon, to try to scare the other side, that is unfortunate. The program is outdated and needs reform. If that reform requires additional monies, than so be it; if if saves money that can be used better in other places GREAT!!
That's what Obama has already done. He saved $700 billion from Medicare without negatively impacting service to seniors. The savings will be realized through efficiencies and reducing over-payments to providers.

Is that the type of reform you have in mind?

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#15 Dec 5, 2012
That is a great start. We need to, although very unpopular, increase the age at which one becomes eligible for medicare, we as a nation are living longer.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#16 Dec 5, 2012
He has not save anything, by the way, the 700 billion is projected savings, execution will be key.

Don't toot that horn to fast, I'd hate to see it go flat.
Dan the Man

Burnt Cabins, PA

#17 Dec 5, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
He has not save anything, by the way, the 700 billion is projected savings, execution will be key.
Don't toot that horn to fast, I'd hate to see it go flat.
ALL cuts are projected cuts since they will all happen in the future. You can't cast doubt on Obama's Medicare savings that have been passed into law without casting doubt on EVERY budget deal.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#18 Dec 5, 2012
Right, so don't brag on projections.

No one wants to compromise for the sake of the country. The President is stuck on raising taxes, the House is stuck on slashing entitlement programs.

Someone take a peak over the edge..... I personally don't think it is going to be as bad as the MSM makes it out to be.

Since: Jun 08

Not Waynesboro or Hagerstown

#19 Dec 5, 2012
Either way the President wins. Taxes go up with or without a deal.
Dan the Man

Burnt Cabins, PA

#20 Dec 5, 2012
GenPatton wrote:
Right, so don't brag on projections.
No one wants to compromise for the sake of the country. The President is stuck on raising taxes, the House is stuck on slashing entitlement programs.
Someone take a peak over the edge..... I personally don't think it is going to be as bad as the MSM makes it out to be.
I wasn't bragging. I was merely pointing out that someone has already done what you say you want done. And I was wondering why you refuse to give him credit for it.

And given his track record, it's not accurate to say that the President isn't willing to compromise. He's just never had a partner to compromise with.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chambersburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Police: Woman drove drunk with child in the car 3 hr Papa Boner 1
rte 30 early mornings (Jan '12) Sep 21 pmn 16
News Body found near Southgate Shopping Center (Oct '10) Sep 20 matt 47
vincent eugene martz Sep 18 friend 1
News Police log (Oct '08) Sep 17 matt raffer 5
Franklin County Drought Sep 14 RobertaP 2
News Fifth DUI: Go to jail, go directly.... (Aug '09) Sep 13 Lamarspoonhour 83

Chambersburg Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chambersburg Mortgages