What Democrats Won't Tell You

What Democrats Won't Tell You

Posted in the Quakertown Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Inquiring Mind

Quakertown, PA

#1 Nov 26, 2012
Saw this in the Intelligencer's "Letters to the Editor" on Monday. I don't know if the numbers are exactly right, but it brings the problem into clear focus.

U.S. tax revenue -$2,170,000,000,000
Federal budget -$3,820,000,000,000
New debt -$1,650,000,000,000
National debt -$14,271,000,000,000
Recent budget cuts -$38,500,000,000

Now, remove 8 zeroes and convert to a household budget to bring it down to a comprehensible scale.

Family income -$21,700
Money spent -$38,200
New credit card debt -$16,500
Credit card balance -$142,710
Total budget cuts so far -$3.85

Additional Revenue from proposed tax increase on the "top 2%" :$8.00

I think that's less than one hour of a Wal-Mart employee's wages going against a $143,000 credit card balance.

The Democrats are trying to sell this as a solution with no budget or explanation of how this money will be spent. Yet this is their most important goal-line stance against going over the fiscal cliff.

With the govt spending $3 billion per DAY in interest alone,$80 billion is only enough to keep the country running for about 8 days. I can't believe so many people bought this crap hook, line, and sinker. Did you?
soyeah

Broomall, PA

#2 Nov 26, 2012
this is an old article and doesnt reflect any current plan.
Inquiring Mind

Quakertown, PA

#3 Nov 26, 2012
soyeah wrote:
this is an old article and doesnt reflect any current plan.
What current plan? There hasn't been a budget in 3 years. The numbers have only gotten worse.
Jersey Duke

Quakertown, PA

#4 Nov 26, 2012
Lets hear about some serious spendinng cuts. I'm listening but I don't hear anything!
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#6 Nov 27, 2012
Inquiring Mind wrote:
Saw this in the Intelligencer's "Letters to the Editor" on Monday. I don't know if the numbers are exactly right, but it brings the problem into clear focus.
U.S. tax revenue -$2,170,000,000,000
Federal budget -$3,820,000,000,000
New debt -$1,650,000,000,000
National debt -$14,271,000,000,000
Recent budget cuts -$38,500,000,000
Now, remove 8 zeroes and convert to a household budget to bring it down to a comprehensible scale.
Family income -$21,700
Money spent -$38,200
New credit card debt -$16,500
Credit card balance -$142,710
Total budget cuts so far -$3.85
Additional Revenue from proposed tax increase on the "top 2%" :$8.00
I think that's less than one hour of a Wal-Mart employee's wages going against a $143,000 credit card balance.
The Democrats are trying to sell this as a solution with no budget or explanation of how this money will be spent. Yet this is their most important goal-line stance against going over the fiscal cliff.
With the govt spending $3 billion per DAY in interest alone,$80 billion is only enough to keep the country running for about 8 days. I can't believe so many people bought this crap hook, line, and sinker. Did you?
typical right wing noise now.
BTW if your so called budget rant included your house and car it would be in line with what most people work with every day.
a budget should reflect all of your assets and expenditures.
as to republicans.
remember the VP Cheney "deficits don't matter" line.
where was the conservative outrage?
nope never happened.
or the republican mantra on a tax loophole that can not be closed.
the un-elected Norquist pulling the republican strings.
and you want to blame Democrats as the sole source of all of your list?
please.
care to name the pain that the republicans plan to bring to their backers?
aside from the vague "closing loopholes" BS
as to defense cuts.
a unneeded weapon system for example?
let me know which one as they cannot seem to focus on curtailing the military/indusstrial complex.
it is easy to claim everyone else can get a haircut but not me.
remember spending bills start in the House.
the republican led House.
smiley

Sunbury, PA

#7 Nov 27, 2012
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
typical right wing noise now.
BTW if your so called budget rant included your house and car it would be in line with what most people work with every day.
a budget should reflect all of your assets and expenditures.
as to republicans.
remember the VP Cheney "deficits don't matter" line.
where was the conservative outrage?
nope never happened.
or the republican mantra on a tax loophole that can not be closed.
the un-elected Norquist pulling the republican strings.
and you want to blame Democrats as the sole source of all of your list?
please.
care to name the pain that the republicans plan to bring to their backers?
aside from the vague "closing loopholes" BS
as to defense cuts.
a unneeded weapon system for example?
let me know which one as they cannot seem to focus on curtailing the military/indusstrial complex.
it is easy to claim everyone else can get a haircut but not me.
remember spending bills start in the House.
the republican led House.
dbar, you would make an excellent scriptwriter.....
why are u looking back and trying to rewrite the script to suit your needs?

Fact is YOUR presidente has a 4 yr track recrod of contributing to the problem.
He was suppose to correct the problems that were supposedly caused by the republicans before him and he has yet to do so!!

What he did was he only made the problem worst!

I have lived through many recessions, high and lows and I cant ever recall folks having such a dismal outlook...

When He took office last term. he swore up and down that he would put an end to the "recession"....in 18 months!
Well we're still waiting arent we!!

Your so purpose is to removed attention off the source of the REAL trouble makers. Like whats in it for u??? More failed promises?
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#8 Nov 27, 2012
smiley wrote:
<quoted text>
dbar, you would make an excellent scriptwriter.....
why are u looking back and trying to rewrite the script to suit your needs?
Fact is YOUR presidente has a 4 yr track recrod of contributing to the problem.
He was suppose to correct the problems that were supposedly caused by the republicans before him and he has yet to do so!!
What he did was he only made the problem worst!
I have lived through many recessions, high and lows and I cant ever recall folks having such a dismal outlook...
When He took office last term. he swore up and down that he would put an end to the "recession"....in 18 months!
Well we're still waiting arent we!!
Your so purpose is to removed attention off the source of the REAL trouble makers. Like whats in it for u??? More failed promises?
not rewriting anything.
BTW it is our President unless you are not a citizen of the US.
your not one of those illegals are you?
the republicans manage to say with a straight face that they are fiscally responsible when the record is quite clear that they are not.
they are part of the problem.
note the topic of the thread.
and as you love the Constitution what does it say about where spending bills originate?
and who controls the House?
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#9 Nov 27, 2012
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
What current plan? There hasn't been a budget in 3 years. The numbers have only gotten worse.
just for info

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/...

"As Congress attempts to negotiate a way to cut the budget deficit and avoid a fiscal cliff, it's worth remembering that one sticking point of the negotiations was supposed to eliminate the deficit problem entirely: the Bush tax cuts. On April 27, 2001, the conservative Heritage Foundation published the above chart, forecasting the effects of then-President George W. Bush's then-proposed tax cuts — a chart that is, in retrospect, pretty hilarious. Pass the Bush tax cuts, the conservative non-profit predicted, and the future would be awesome. The tax cuts would so stimulate the economy that the government would start bringing in extra money starting in 2008. Alas, in real life, the Bush tax cuts led to huge budget deficits, and 2008 was, as you may also remember, the year of the financial crisis. "
Jersey Duke

Quakertown, PA

#10 Nov 27, 2012
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
just for info
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/...
"As Congress attempts to negotiate a way to cut the budget deficit and avoid a fiscal cliff, it's worth remembering that one sticking point of the negotiations was supposed to eliminate the deficit problem entirely: the Bush tax cuts. On April 27, 2001, the conservative Heritage Foundation published the above chart, forecasting the effects of then-President George W. Bush's then-proposed tax cuts — a chart that is, in retrospect, pretty hilarious. Pass the Bush tax cuts, the conservative non-profit predicted, and the future would be awesome. The tax cuts would so stimulate the economy that the government would start bringing in extra money starting in 2008. Alas, in real life, the Bush tax cuts led to huge budget deficits, and 2008 was, as you may also remember, the year of the financial crisis. "
It would have worked had the dems not pushed the community reinvestment act which forced the banks to lend to goofballs that could never pay their mortgages, and caused the housing bubble that popped. We have Bwaney Frank, Cris Dodd, Franklin Raines and Bill Clinton to thank for the financial crisis.
Jersey Duke

Quakertown, PA

#11 Nov 27, 2012
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
just for info
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/...
"As Congress attempts to negotiate a way to cut the budget deficit and avoid a fiscal cliff, it's worth remembering that one sticking point of the negotiations was supposed to eliminate the deficit problem entirely: the Bush tax cuts. On April 27, 2001, the conservative Heritage Foundation published the above chart, forecasting the effects of then-President George W. Bush's then-proposed tax cuts — a chart that is, in retrospect, pretty hilarious. Pass the Bush tax cuts, the conservative non-profit predicted, and the future would be awesome. The tax cuts would so stimulate the economy that the government would start bringing in extra money starting in 2008. Alas, in real life, the Bush tax cuts led to huge budget deficits, and 2008 was, as you may also remember, the year of the financial crisis. "
Don't even start about budget deficits, obama is the king of that.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#12 Nov 27, 2012
Jersey Duke wrote:
<quoted text>
It would have worked had the dems not pushed the community reinvestment act which forced the banks to lend to goofballs that could never pay their mortgages, and caused the housing bubble that popped. We have Bwaney Frank, Cris Dodd, Franklin Raines and Bill Clinton to thank for the financial crisis.
as usual the birther gets it wrong again.
President Bush bragged about the increase in home ownership and claimed it was due to republican policies.
you know the guy the right wing has put into the "memory hole".

try

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/ta...

"Silverstein responded by issuing the following tirade to John Mongelluzzo, Bear's VP for Due Diligence, demanding that he not get in the way of Bear's insane goal of funding 500 mortgages a day:

"I refuse to receive more emails from [Verchleiser](or anyone else) questioning why we’re not funding loans every day. I’m holding each of you responsible for making sure we fund at least 500 each and every day… I was not happy when I saw the funding numbers and I knew NY would NOT BE HAPPY... I expect to see 500+ every day. I will do whatever is necessary to make sure you’re successful in meeting this objective."

Whenever any right-wing loon, or Bloombergite, tries to tell you the mortgage crisis was caused by the government forcing the poor banks to lend to broke black people, please direct them to this passage. The banks not only wanted to give out these loans, they wanted to give them out at the speed of light. They wanted to crank them out so fast that their own auditors literally couldn't read the writing on the loan applications. This was greed, not policy. Anybody who says anything else is high on something."
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#13 Nov 27, 2012
Jersey Duke wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't even start about budget deficits, obama is the king of that.
as usual you get it wrong again.
who controls the spending of the US government?
Congress controls the spending.
Inquiring Mind

North Wales, PA

#14 Nov 27, 2012
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
typical right wing noise now.
BTW if your so called budget rant included your house and car it would be in line with what most people work with every day.
a budget should reflect all of your assets and expenditures.
as to republicans.
remember the VP Cheney "deficits don't matter" line.
where was the conservative outrage?
nope never happened.
or the republican mantra on a tax loophole that can not be closed.
the un-elected Norquist pulling the republican strings.
and you want to blame Democrats as the sole source of all of your list?
please.
care to name the pain that the republicans plan to bring to their backers?
aside from the vague "closing loopholes" BS
as to defense cuts.
a unneeded weapon system for example?
let me know which one as they cannot seem to focus on curtailing the military/indusstrial complex.
it is easy to claim everyone else can get a haircut but not me.
remember spending bills start in the House.
the republican led House.
Noise? It's simple math and you and the Democrats are not offering any serious solutions. You're more interested in kicking the can down the road, blaming ghosts, and maintaining power. You continue the "walk down selective memory lane" criticizing Cheney from a time when the problem was less than half what it is now. What difference does it make to point that out?

Problems aren't solved in the past, they need to be solved in the present. Obama didn't listen to his own commission's recommendations to control spending and address the defict. He isn't listening to anyone but his Left-wing puppeteers.
Rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic is not solution to the impending iceberg. But Democrats continue to manipulate people into believing that what we really need to do is to spend and borrow more without any budget or accountability.

I'm not sure what point you were making about assets. They are NOT part of a budget, which is purely income vs. expenses. Why even bring up Norquist's pledge from decades ago? It is irrelevant because the proposed tax increase will only pay for 8 days of govt operation. Why not stop wasteful spending and borrowing and THEN create a budget to analyze revenue? That's the only logical way to proceed. What sane person thinks the answer is to throw good money after bad? What sane person thinks that even addresses the problem.

We need tax REFORM and your claim that Republicans will refuse to close loopholes is lame and played out. That's what they are proposing as a compromise if you've been watching and reading the news. It's DEMOCRATS who bristle at spending cuts for their special interests and any real plan for addressing entitlement reform. It's Obama who falsely claimed to be open to Republican proposals and is failing to participate or lead the negotiations. Conservative plans to get control of spending may start in the House, but they DIE in the Democrat Senate.

You offer no solutions or real rationale for the Democrat's "plan"for using additional revenue as we face the fiscal cliff. Only bringing up ghosts of Republicans past and questions that are intended to obfuscate rather than inform. Why don't YOU tell me how taking $80 billion out of the private sector will help with trillion-dollar annual deficits, the $16 trillion debt on its way to $20 trillion dollars, 175 million Americans on food stamps, high unemployment, massive entitlement fraud and govt waste, and borrowing 40 cents out of every dollar spent. Maybe you could ask Grover Norquist or Dick Cheney or George W. Bush. Make pretend any of them are relevant today - or an excuse for what Obama is doing to the country now that it's his economy.
Inquiring Mind

North Wales, PA

#15 Nov 27, 2012
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
just for info
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/...
"As Congress attempts to negotiate a way to cut the budget deficit and avoid a fiscal cliff, it's worth remembering that one sticking point of the negotiations was supposed to eliminate the deficit problem entirely: the Bush tax cuts. On April 27, 2001, the conservative Heritage Foundation published the above chart, forecasting the effects of then-President George W. Bush's then-proposed tax cuts — a chart that is, in retrospect, pretty hilarious. Pass the Bush tax cuts, the conservative non-profit predicted, and the future would be awesome. The tax cuts would so stimulate the economy that the government would start bringing in extra money starting in 2008. Alas, in real life, the Bush tax cuts led to huge budget deficits, and 2008 was, as you may also remember, the year of the financial crisis. "
Why is this "worth remembering"? It doesn't help solve anything and the deficits are still running at a trillion dollars year after year even after candidate Obama called them "irresponsible" and "unpatriotic." If ANYTHING is worth remembering, it's those words from your chosen one.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#16 Nov 27, 2012
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Noise? It's simple math and you and the Democrats are not offering any serious solutions. You're more interested in kicking the can down the road, blaming ghosts, and maintaining power. You continue the "walk down selective memory lane" criticizing Cheney from a time when the problem was less than half what it is now. What difference does it make to point that out?
Problems aren't solved in the past, they need to be solved in the present. Obama didn't listen to his own commission's recommendations to control spending and address the defict. He isn't listening to anyone but his Left-wing puppeteers.
Rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic is not solution to the impending iceberg. But Democrats continue to manipulate people into believing that what we really need to do is to spend and borrow more without any budget or accountability.
I'm not sure what point you were making about assets. They are NOT part of a budget, which is purely income vs. expenses. Why even bring up Norquist's pledge from decades ago? It is irrelevant because the proposed tax increase will only pay for 8 days of govt operation. Why not stop wasteful spending and borrowing and THEN create a budget to analyze revenue? That's the only logical way to proceed. What sane person thinks the answer is to throw good money after bad? What sane person thinks that even addresses the problem.
We need tax REFORM and your claim that Republicans will refuse to close loopholes is lame and played out. That's what they are proposing as a compromise if you've been watching and reading the news. It's DEMOCRATS who bristle at spending cuts for their special interests and any real plan for addressing entitlement reform. It's Obama who falsely claimed to be open to Republican proposals and is failing to participate or lead the negotiations. Conservative plans to get control of spending may start in the House, but they DIE in the Democrat Senate.
You offer no solutions or real rationale for the Democrat's "plan"for using additional revenue as we face the fiscal cliff. Only bringing up ghosts of Republicans past and questions that are intended to obfuscate rather than inform. Why don't YOU tell me how taking $80 billion out of the private sector will help with trillion-dollar annual deficits, the $16 trillion debt on its way to $20 trillion dollars, 175 million Americans on food stamps, high unemployment, massive entitlement fraud and govt waste, and borrowing 40 cents out of every dollar spent. Maybe you could ask Grover Norquist or Dick Cheney or George W. Bush. Make pretend any of them are relevant today - or an excuse for what Obama is doing to the country now that it's his economy.
so lets see

your mortgage payment(house)is not part of your budget?
your automobile?
please.
your article kinda forgot that.
name the tax loophole the republicans are willing to close?
better yet why have they not closed it since they took charge of the House?
they have no responsibility to close those loopholes?
i thought they claimed to be fiscally astute.
or is that just another example of their smoke and mirrors
norquist still owns the majority of republicans.
claiming that the republicans are the party of compromise is just good for a belly laugh.
they objected and hindered or tried to kill anything proposed by the President.
even legislation that they themselves thought was a good idea.
claiming that Democrats are the sole problem is quite wrong.
you want to reform spending fine.
why did your topic thread title not include republicans?
you consider them blameless for the current problems?
sounds like you have selective (partisan)blinders on.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#17 Nov 27, 2012
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is this "worth remembering"? It doesn't help solve anything and the deficits are still running at a trillion dollars year after year even after candidate Obama called them "irresponsible" and "unpatriotic." If ANYTHING is worth remembering, it's those words from your chosen one.
so you believe that the Bush tax cuts were a bad idea?
that the claims of cutting rates would lead to pure bliss in economic terms was just bovine scatology?
Inquiring Mind

North Wales, PA

#18 Nov 27, 2012
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
so lets see
your mortgage payment(house)is not part of your budget?
your automobile?
please.
your article kinda forgot that.
name the tax loophole the republicans are willing to close?
better yet why have they not closed it since they took charge of the House?
they have no responsibility to close those loopholes?
i thought they claimed to be fiscally astute.
or is that just another example of their smoke and mirrors
norquist still owns the majority of republicans.
claiming that the republicans are the party of compromise is just good for a belly laugh.
they objected and hindered or tried to kill anything proposed by the President.
even legislation that they themselves thought was a good idea.
claiming that Democrats are the sole problem is quite wrong.
you want to reform spending fine.
why did your topic thread title not include republicans?
you consider them blameless for the current problems?
sounds like you have selective (partisan)blinders on.
You didn't say anything about paying for assets, you said assets. Payments are liabilities, not assets. So I don't even know why you brought that up. What does it change?

Again with naming loopholes? Why do you need me to do that? Maximum limit on deductions of $50K? How's that? No deduction on second mortgage interest? How's that? Increase the SS contribution threshold? How's that? Whatever, it will bring in as much or more revenue from the "rich" than raising tax rates. But Obama and the Dems obstinately refuse any proposal from Republicans and then blame them for gridlock. Your obsession with Norquist Nobody is a little strange if you ask me.

Why didn't Dems close loopholes when they controlled BOTH houses?
To busy dismantling the healthcare system and paying back the special interests, I guess. The headline doesn't include Republicans because the topic is that the Democrats don't want people to know how inconsequential the revenue would be from the proposed tax increase that is holding up real movement, and the refusal of the Democrats to consider a balanced budget and plan BEFORE resorting to job-killing taxes. The truth is that Republican leadership is giving indications that they are willing to compromise and even go against "the pledge" for the good of the country. All Obama is doing is digging in his heels and making politically motivated decisions that are leading us along the path to Greece.
Inquiring Mind

North Wales, PA

#19 Nov 27, 2012
dbar wrote:
<quoted text>
so you believe that the Bush tax cuts were a bad idea?
that the claims of cutting rates would lead to pure bliss in economic terms was just bovine scatology?
Borrowing 40 cents for every dollar spent is a bad idea.
I never said cutting tax rates is the answer to everything,
but it sure helped Reagan get out of Carter's recession.
And Obama sure learned to like Dubya's spending and borrowing habits, didn't he? He just doubled down, lied to you, me and everyone else right to our faces. I guess that's okay with you. After all, he's a nice guy and trying so hard, too. He and his new Muslim Brotherhead friend, Morsi of Egypt, have a lot in common.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#20 Nov 27, 2012
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't say anything about paying for assets, you said assets. Payments are liabilities, not assets. So I don't even know why you brought that up. What does it change?
Again with naming loopholes? Why do you need me to do that? Maximum limit on deductions of $50K? How's that? No deduction on second mortgage interest? How's that? Increase the SS contribution threshold? How's that? Whatever, it will bring in as much or more revenue from the "rich" than raising tax rates. But Obama and the Dems obstinately refuse any proposal from Republicans and then blame them for gridlock. Your obsession with Norquist Nobody is a little strange if you ask me.
Why didn't Dems close loopholes when they controlled BOTH houses?
To busy dismantling the healthcare system and paying back the special interests, I guess. The headline doesn't include Republicans because the topic is that the Democrats don't want people to know how inconsequential the revenue would be from the proposed tax increase that is holding up real movement, and the refusal of the Democrats to consider a balanced budget and plan BEFORE resorting to job-killing taxes. The truth is that Republican leadership is giving indications that they are willing to compromise and even go against "the pledge" for the good of the country. All Obama is doing is digging in his heels and making politically motivated decisions that are leading us along the path to Greece.
again if you add the amount owed on your house and car to your "budget" argument the numbers are not much different then the average debt load of most Americans.
maximum deduction 50k
please never happen.
beside the republicans hedge by only considering income.
second mortgage interest raises how much?
SS contribution with the increase of payments that would go out to those retirees?

the republicans are posturing and believe that they can gut the safety nets while retaining their interests.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#21 Nov 27, 2012
Inquiring Mind wrote:
<quoted text>
Borrowing 40 cents for every dollar spent is a bad idea.
I never said cutting tax rates is the answer to everything,
but it sure helped Reagan get out of Carter's recession.
And Obama sure learned to like Dubya's spending and borrowing habits, didn't he? He just doubled down, lied to you, me and everyone else right to our faces. I guess that's okay with you. After all, he's a nice guy and trying so hard, too. He and his new Muslim Brotherhead friend, Morsi of Egypt, have a lot in common.
so borrowing money to pay for the Bush tax cuts does not make much sense does it?
the republicans want that to go away?
must of missed that headline.

as to Egypt guess election results by the voters does not matter if they have different views than what we expect?
they do not get to choose their own path?
BTW when did the President claim Morsi as a best bud.
or is that another right wing exaggeration.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
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.

Quakertown Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ametek U.S. Gauge (Jul '12) 14 hr Its Time 135
Morning star (Nov '15) Sun bob 24
Planetfitttness /Harbor freight Sat me 7
YMCA /workout plus merge May 21 Stick Arms 18
Richland Township Times May 21 Whose fault 13
Tim Arnold Richland Township supervisor May 19 Charle 27
Qtown School Board May 19 Oscar 4
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Quakertown Mortgages