PO LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Deficit reduction without revenue?

U.S. Rep. Bill Shuster is right: The American people do need a "fact based" conversation on the budget. Full Story
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Really

Loysville, PA

#1 Apr 13, 2011
spot on brother. The republican tools have never balanced a budget, it took a liberal named Clinton to get that job done.
raven

Chambersburg, PA

#3 Apr 13, 2011
So long as the GOP members of congress do the bidding of their rich and corporate masters nothing will change. It's time that they paid their share instead of getting rebates and enjoying the tax loopholes that they purchased by funding a bunch of blowhards.
The rich provide no revenues for valuable social programs and the corporations use tax havens to avoid paying their fair share and reducing overhead by shipping jobs overseas. Long overdue is a revision of the tax code eliminating loopholes and taxing income at appropriate levels for all Americans. Attacking the deficit by eliminating safety net programs that the GOP hates is a waste of time and effort and only shows Republican disdain for the middle class, the poor, the elderly and any organization that offers a liberal view.
are you serious

Philadelphia, PA

#4 Apr 13, 2011
cut cut cut cut and tax the shale industry!!!! woo hoo! heck, have the shale industry send us the money directly!!! I'll be waitin by my mailbox!
are you serious

Philadelphia, PA

#5 Apr 13, 2011
Oh...and TAX THE RICH!!!
Proud to be an American

Waynesboro, PA

#6 Apr 13, 2011
If it wouldn't be for Bill Shuster and Rich Alloway this area would be hurting much more than it is. It pains me to tolerate these other Republicans we have in office, particularly our impotent state reps. Be thankful you have these two guys.
handyman

Chambersburg, PA

#7 Apr 13, 2011
Mark,

If you go back over history you'll notice that the problem isn't one of party lines. The problem is one of greed. It really doesn't matter which party is in office so long as 'we the people' continue to want to give over control to Government without us stepping up and saying "Enough is Enough"!

Don't you wish that you had 'aides','secretaries','runners '(pages'), and a whole group of people to do your bidding at your job?

And all of them being paid with someone elses money?

What about a tremendous health care package and retirement fund that is not connected to the (and get this term) the "COMMON PEOPLE".(Doesn't that term just fry you?)

If 'we the people' simply step up to the plate and say "We're not paying until you start listening and become a part of the same 'Social' security packages we have, etc." And we actually do stop paying - they can't put us all in jail or they wouldn't have anyone to tax - they might pay attention.

How about this final thought: When you run for a position and are elected you take your same retirement plan and health care plan into the position. Nothing 'special' funded differently than before. That way, when you get voted out 'we the people' don't have to continue to fund your 'better than the COMMON PEOPLE'S plans.
Pulled Pork

Jersey Shore, PA

#8 Apr 13, 2011
Proud to be an American must love pork. The two people he praises are the two biggest feeders at the government trough. He must be on the staff of one of these guys.
Just me

Chambersburg, PA

#9 Apr 13, 2011
"Instead of a defined benefit, future recipients will receive vouchers to buy medical insurance from private insurers who will no doubt be lining up to write affordable policies for the old and sick" Please save us all from these greedy insurance companies. Have any of you tried to read thru all the nonsense sent to seniors who must try to understand exactly what they are buying/paying for in all those supplemental medicare insurance brochures? It is a nightmare. Just what we need is more junk mail. Mr. Scriptunas has written the first intelligent article I have seen in many years. Are these people elected only because there is no one running who truly wants to represent we the people???
Dan the Man

Abington, PA

#11 Apr 13, 2011
Imagine if, in the midst of a larger discussion about debt reduction, the Democrats' most powerful leaders drew a line in the sand: no spending cuts. Period. Full stop.

Dems, in this hypothetical, said they agreed with the importance of addressing the problem, but before the debate advanced, they wanted to make one thing clear: spending cuts would be bad for the economy, so Republicans ought to just forget about it.

Democrats would compromise, but not on this fundamental point. If we're going to tackle the problem, they'd say, the exclusive focus would be on receipts, not expenditures.

If Democrats were to take this line, it's safe to assume they'd be mocked, laughed at, and dismissed as unserious. And yet, Republican leaders are making this precise argument, only from the other direction.

House Speaker John A. Boehner will issue a warning Tuesday to President Obama a day before the president is set to deliver a major speech on the nation's deficit: Raising taxes is "unacceptable and a nonstarter."

But he says a proposal by the president that includes tax increases will be treated as evidence that the president is not serious about dealing with the country's long-term fiscal health.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/ind...

----------

Precisely.

It boggles my mind that ANYBODY takes these Republicans seriously.

They obviously aren't serious about addressing the deficit. Hell, Ryan's plan makes enormous cuts in expenses but cuts revenue so much that his plan actually does not shrink the deficit or address the debt.

It's all about cutting programs they hate while giving tax cuts to the rich. They are simply using the current economic conditions as an excuse.
LIL JOHN

Shippensburg, PA

#12 Apr 13, 2011
Dan the Man wrote:
Imagine if, in the midst of a larger discussion about debt reduction, the Democrats' most powerful leaders drew a line in the sand: no spending cuts. Period. Full stop.
Dems, in this hypothetical, said they agreed with the importance of addressing the problem, but before the debate advanced, they wanted to make one thing clear: spending cuts would be bad for the economy, so Republicans ought to just forget about it.
Democrats would compromise, but not on this fundamental point. If we're going to tackle the problem, they'd say, the exclusive focus would be on receipts, not expenditures.
If Democrats were to take this line, it's safe to assume they'd be mocked, laughed at, and dismissed as unserious. And yet, Republican leaders are making this precise argument, only from the other direction.
House Speaker John A. Boehner will issue a warning Tuesday to President Obama a day before the president is set to deliver a major speech on the nation's deficit: Raising taxes is "unacceptable and a nonstarter."
But he says a proposal by the president that includes tax increases will be treated as evidence that the president is not serious about dealing with the country's long-term fiscal health.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/ind...
----------
Precisely.
It boggles my mind that ANYBODY takes these Republicans seriously.
They obviously aren't serious about addressing the deficit. Hell, Ryan's plan makes enormous cuts in expenses but cuts revenue so much that his plan actually does not shrink the deficit or address the debt.
It's all about cutting programs they hate while giving tax cuts to the rich. They are simply using the current economic conditions as an excuse.
The Congressional budget office said that the 2012 budget that Obama is putting forth will double the debt by 2021 !

Imagine that~ Even with his '''tax hikes''', Maybe that's why he wants his energy tax to boot!

Remember the words in the Cap and trade debacle '''Revenue Enhancer'''

'Tax and Spend Liberals' have that millstone for a reason!

Obama has been and will be a disaster till he goes in early 2013///

Remember the farce of Obama-Care that he said would reduce the deficit?
Where was his reduce the debt mentality then?

Obama has changed his official middle name recently from Hussein to Hypocrisy , but the initials (BHO) stay the same on his luggage!
Paul S 69

Spring Grove, PA

#13 Apr 13, 2011
Negative
Blah

Chambersburg, PA

#15 Apr 13, 2011
Really wrote:
spot on brother. The republican tools have never balanced a budget, it took a liberal named Clinton to get that job done.
Wrong, it took a liberal democrat who moved to the right when the Republicans took over Congress. It took a Democrat who worked with the Republicans and not his own liberal wing.(Until the ignorant republicans went after him)

And I cannot stress that the congressional republicans and democrat President worked together. Something I'm afraid will not happen in 2011.
Blah

Chambersburg, PA

#16 Apr 13, 2011
Dan the Man wrote:
Imagine if, in the midst of a larger discussion about debt reduction, the Democrats' most powerful leaders drew a line in the sand: no spending cuts. Period. Full stop.
Dems, in this hypothetical, said they agreed with the importance of addressing the problem, but before the debate advanced, they wanted to make one thing clear: spending cuts would be bad for the economy, so Republicans ought to just forget about it.
Democrats would compromise, but not on this fundamental point. If we're going to tackle the problem, they'd say, the exclusive focus would be on receipts, not expenditures.
If Democrats were to take this line, it's safe to assume they'd be mocked, laughed at, and dismissed as unserious. And yet, Republican leaders are making this precise argument, only from the other direction.
House Speaker John A. Boehner will issue a warning Tuesday to President Obama a day before the president is set to deliver a major speech on the nation's deficit: Raising taxes is "unacceptable and a nonstarter."
But he says a proposal by the president that includes tax increases will be treated as evidence that the president is not serious about dealing with the country's long-term fiscal health.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/ind...
----------
Precisely.
It boggles my mind that ANYBODY takes these Republicans seriously.
They obviously aren't serious about addressing the deficit. Hell, Ryan's plan makes enormous cuts in expenses but cuts revenue so much that his plan actually does not shrink the deficit or address the debt.
It's all about cutting programs they hate while giving tax cuts to the rich. They are simply using the current economic conditions as an excuse.
Dan,

Come on now. Obama had the opportunity with his budget submission to include aspects of his debt reduction commission and he chose not to embrace the tought to do things. The republicans now outline a hard nose position in response. Just like the tax cuts/unemployment compromise.

You want the republicans initial proposal to already give something away? Obama didn't.

All that said. Boehner is in a tough spot as well. I don't see him as a tea bagger, yet he represents them. Obama has the same problem on the left. I'm afraid that the radical elements on boith sides will drive the debate, not the practical middle ground.

Never balance the budget with spending cuts alone, and tax increases always get used for increased spending not balancing the budget.
Blah

Chambersburg, PA

#17 Apr 13, 2011
Dave wrote:
I'll take tax & spend over Borrow & spend as did the Republicans under Bush.
How did the Republicans pay for the two wars & tax cuts?
How did Bush say he was paying for a prescription drug plan for seniors?
That's all spending. Big time expensive spending.
All without eve a thought of how it would e pad fir.
Heck, maybe the Republicans though running two wars off budget meany=t they were free?
And these same people: McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, Pense did all those things & now are crying blaming Democrats.
You usual drivel is the opportunity to post this link:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/04/12/grander...
Dan the Man

Abington, PA

#18 Apr 13, 2011
Blah wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan,
Come on now. Obama had the opportunity with his budget submission to include aspects of his debt reduction commission and he chose not to embrace the tought to do things. The republicans now outline a hard nose position in response. Just like the tax cuts/unemployment compromise.
You want the republicans initial proposal to already give something away? Obama didn't.
All that said. Boehner is in a tough spot as well. I don't see him as a tea bagger, yet he represents them. Obama has the same problem on the left. I'm afraid that the radical elements on boith sides will drive the debate, not the practical middle ground.
Never balance the budget with spending cuts alone, and tax increases always get used for increased spending not balancing the budget.
All I'm doing is criticizing the extremist position the GOP is taking - no tax increases, no way, now how, don't even bring up the idea. Are you defending that? Or are you just looking for something to argue with me about?
Overtaxed

Greencastle, PA

#22 Apr 13, 2011
Balance the budget - easy:
Eliminate the Dept of Energy, Dept of Ed, Dept of Ag, IRS, Abolish tax witholdin, implement the FAIR TAX.
Corporations will come back to America because there are no corporate taxes to increase costs, no payroll taxes (cheaper to prepare payroll) etc.

Then start hacking away at the vile entitlement programs.
Blah

Chambersburg, PA

#24 Apr 13, 2011
Dave wrote:
<quoted text>
If it were the Republicans that pushed for this balanced budget, what happened after Clinton left office?
Congress did not change or it got more Republican.
But the balanced budget was left in the rear view mirror as deficits climbed.
Same Congress. What changed?
Yes they worked together but the above would indicate the driving force was Bill Clinton.
You've already answered that...Bush. And 9/11.
Blah

Chambersburg, PA

#25 Apr 13, 2011
Dan the Man wrote:
<quoted text>
All I'm doing is criticizing the extremist position the GOP is taking - no tax increases, no way, now how, don't even bring up the idea. Are you defending that? Or are you just looking for something to argue with me about?
And I'm saying that one doesn't enter negotiations already giving away something..which you seem to think the initial republican position should do. All that and the Speaker has to appease the tea baggers at least in the beginning. Or did you miss the tax cut/unemployment line?
Blah

Chambersburg, PA

#26 Apr 13, 2011
Dave wrote:
<quoted text>
My mistake, please tell me how we paid for the two wars, Bush tax cuts and drug program for seniors.
I'm really tired of your krapp. Put up or shut up.
Show me the bills that either raised taxes to pay for these things or spending cuts that were made to fund these things.
Heck, just show me where Republicans discussed the possibility of paying for them.
And the democrats did nothing to contribute to the mess. Like I said, more of your one side drivel.
Overtaxed

Greencastle, PA

#27 Apr 13, 2011
What do the listed departments (Ag, Energy, Ed, IRS) actually DO for America? Please, before you answer - review their budgets.

Why are you so against cutting spending? Why do we always have to raise taxes on someone?
Dave wrote:
<quoted text>
I mean we all know energy is irrelevant ( we just export hundreds of billions is cash). Food is irrelevant (food, dschmood, who cares). And we all know we don't need no education (in the 50's education was considered a national defense issue).
And really, name the Companies that ceased being US companies? There must be a long, long list. I mean, you do realize that, for example, if GM opened a subsidiary in Ireland, it would pay the Irish tax rate & then owe the difference to the US.
I mean, so, exactly how does that effect US companies building overseas?
All we need to do is to eliminate the tax dodge that says they don't have to pay that tax as along as they keep the money (i.e. invest it) overseas.
The simple route ending to our debt problem? End the Bush tax cuts. It is that simple.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
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.

Franklin County Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Manitowoc layoff tallies to 315 (Jan '09) Jul '14 Abjewljebar 85
Episodes of worst reality show ever Jun '14 Really 1
shooting on i81 Jun '14 getem 1
egor Jun '14 martz 1
Department of justice announces charges against... May '14 spud 2
Cash, potato chips stolen from Franklin County ... May '14 Ha Ha 3
Harrisburg City freezes hiring to manage budget... Apr '14 lady 1

Franklin County People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE