Obama Not Serious About Debt/Deficit ...

Obama Not Serious About Debt/Deficit Reduction

Posted in the Coopersburg Forum

Inquiring Mind

Cape May Court House, NJ

#1 Mar 9, 2013
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788...

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.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#2 Mar 9, 2013
Inquiring Mind wrote:
http://online.wsj.com/article/ SB1000142412788732349450457834 0181878017820.html?mod=googlen ews_wsj
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.
your article is behind a paywall.

try

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files...

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofil...

the numbers vetted by the CBO are there and the deficit reduction numbers.
Inquiring Mind

Cape May Court House, NJ

#3 Mar 9, 2013
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>your article is behind a paywall.

try

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files...

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofil...

the numbers vetted by the CBO are there and the deficit reduction numbers.
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.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#4 Mar 9, 2013
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
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.
Inquiring Mind

Cape May Court House, NJ

#5 Mar 9, 2013
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>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.
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.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#6 Mar 9, 2013
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
and republicans claimed "deficits don't matter"
ryan's plan

just some examples

"The Path assumes that unemployment will steadily drop to 2.8% by 2021.[51] 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.[48] 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?
Inquiring Mind

Cape May Court House, NJ

#7 Mar 9, 2013
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>and republicans claimed "deficits don't matter"
ryan's plan

just some examples

"The Path assumes that unemployment will steadily drop to 2.8% by 2021.[51] 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.[48] 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?
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.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#8 Mar 9, 2013
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
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.
fortunately he is not in the WH.
Info

Broomall, PA

#9 Mar 10, 2013
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
fortunately he is not in the WH.
Fortunately for whom? Not us!
Jersey Duke

Quakertown, PA

#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!!
Revere

Newtown Square, PA

#11 Mar 10, 2013
Info wrote:
<quoted text>Fortunately for whom? Not us!
No, not you! For dbar the illegal immigrant.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Coopersburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
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

Coopersburg Jobs

Personal Finance

Coopersburg Mortgages