Obama Not Serious About Debt/Deficit Reduction
Posted in the Coopersburg Forum
#1 Mar 9, 2013
This is why Bill O'Reilly flipped out and called Liberal Alan Colmes a liar on his show. Colmes insisted that Obama had proposed real spending cuts to address trillion-dollar annual deficits and a $17 trillion debt and that Republicans were to blame for being obstructionists.
O'Reilly asked for "specifics" and Colmes tried to spin an answer that was vague and non-specific. It's clear from this WSJ article and Obama's own proposals that the Democrat "plan" does nothing except increase taxes to allow spending to continue unchecked for the next 4 years.
#2 Mar 9, 2013
your article is behind a paywall.
the numbers vetted by the CBO are there and the deficit reduction numbers.
#3 Mar 9, 2013
The CBO numbers and the WH proposed budget are based on new Medicare reductions to providers and other legislative changes that don't have a chance of even passing the Democrat Senate. Smoke and mirrors.
#4 Mar 9, 2013
and the ryan plan had any chance of passing?
nevertheless the deficit numbers are there and show reductions.
so the "no reduction proposed argument" is not true.
#5 Mar 9, 2013
How will reducing the deficit to $900 million help reduce a $17 trillion debt?
Not a serious proposal. At least Ryan's plan takes a real swipe at spending. Only Democrats would consider a little less borrowing as a spending cut.
Of course, Nancy Pelosi just said that a tax cut is actually spending so eliminating tax cuts reduces spending. So in her universe it makes sense.
#6 Mar 9, 2013
and republicans claimed "deficits don't matter"
just some examples
"The Path assumes that unemployment will steadily drop to 2.8% by 2021. This would be the lowest annualized unemployment rate since the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), began tracking unemployment in 1948"
"The Path also projects federal tax revenue to be 19% GDP, up from the 2011 level of 15.5% GDP. This had been called unrealistic because the Path calls for $4.6 trillion in tax cuts with no offsetting tax increases, other than the closing of unspecified tax loopholes."
"A grouping of spending categories called "Other Mandatory and Defense and Non-Defense Discretionary spending" would be reduced from 12% GDP in 2010 to 3.5% by 2050."
lastly if ryans's plan is such a good one he should have wanted to implement it immediately.
why wait ten years?
and no cuts on defense spending of any kind?
#7 Mar 9, 2013
Last time I looked, Ryan wasn't in the White House. That's where people look for leadership. No debate allowed on Republican proposals in Harry Reid's Senate. It's where budget proposals go to die.
#8 Mar 9, 2013
fortunately he is not in the WH.
#9 Mar 10, 2013
Fortunately for whom? Not us!
#10 Mar 10, 2013
Only dumber could argue that the president who took the national debt from 10 Trillion to almost 17 Trillion in just over 4 years is for spending cuts!! That's all the Duke needs to say!!
#11 Mar 10, 2013
No, not you! For dbar the illegal immigrant.
Add your comments below
|Just Furniture||20 hr||Tired of it all||3|
|The best hand in town?||Mon||Bumpindabigboyy69||2|
|Explosions in Milford!?||Mon||Mr Q||7|
|QCSD Board Members||May 18||Curious||32|
|Quakertown Massage Parlors/Spas *BUSTED* (Oct '10)||May 14||Andrew||108|
|Kumry Rd glass company||May 14||Carphunter64||3|
|Orloff vs. Arnold (Oct '16)||May 14||snoop dawg||41|
Find what you want!
Search Coopersburg Forum Now
Copyright © 2018 Topix LLC