Same ol Same ol,,,,,,,,,Republicans went into the deficit talks with one thing in mind,,,,,,,Cut taxes for the rich and offset 1% of that by starving the elderly and disabled, Their math just doesn't work PERIOD

"The country wants to be spoken to like adults, not pandered to like children," Ryan said Tuesday on "CBS This Morning."...This is an interesting statement by a member of a party that has done nothing toward helping this country in any way for the past 3 years since Obama was elected..They act as if Bush was so great, yet it was he, Bush, that helped to bring on the huge debt tgis country faces by puting tax cuts in place for his wealthy friends while starting a war that was not to be paid for. We have today a congress that together acts more like childrent than our children. For Ryan to make this statement is amazing..he must feel that no one except himself and his republican friends know what the voters want. Yet, they listen to no one but themselves.

More fluff...just like the candidates. I WANT SOME MEAT & POTATOES...FACTS PLEASE...PLEASE!

If one plans to defeat an adversary one must have a plan and their supporters, particularly their generals, must know the main objectives, other than "we're better/they're worse".

SO GIVE ME SOMETHING TO VOTE FOR...I ALREADY KNOW WHAT I'M AGAINST ! ! !

If it is the same old from Republicans, then it is the same old from Democrats as well. The only thing we ever hear is how Democrats want to raise taxes. Funny how Democrats pretend to be the guardians of entitlements but they are the ones that cut the payroll tax which directly funds social security. They are also the party that cut 500 billion from Medicare to fund ObamaCare.

This country is absolutely facing a financial crisis regardless of what politicians will say during an election year. We have to cut spending, and we can start by pulling home all our troops and closing bases around the globe that are left over from WWII and the Cold War. But since our troops are deployed to protect the interests of politically connected corporations don't expect that to happen any time soon.

We need an entire tax code overhaul and not some targeted tax breaks or reductions. We need to close all tax loopholes and end all tax subsidies for all industries. But since our tax code is used by every politician regardless of party affiliation to peddle influence in exchange for favors and IOU's, then don't expect that to happen any time soon.

What you can expect is that there will be stark differences in party proposals to a financial problem that is getting worse by the day. You can also expect both sides will entrench in the same tried and true warfare to defend their positions whether truly noble or not. Finally, you can expect nothing to change but the amount of debt this country owes, and the problems persisting until we reach the point of crisis or collapse. By then of course none of these politicians will be around to answer for it, as they will be living large off the huge pension benefits they never failed to pass for themselves.

The sinister Ryan Plan would inflict much greater cutbacks on Medicare and Social Security than the Obama plan. The debate surrounding the GOP/Tea Party's Ryan Plan will frighten, offend, and alienate seniors at a time when the Republican Party has alienated nearly every other voter bloc in the country. The Party of No is rapidly becoming The Party of Fail.

Why don't we pay back Social Security and Medicare that funded these useless wars?

Better yet, how about cutting out Medicare fraud? Do you know how many people who haven't worked a day in this country are getting Medicare? I've seen legal aliens coming in on work visas and bringing their parents. Their parents go and get SSI & medicare. It's shocking.

So, people blame Republicans - and yeah, they have a ton of faults - but don't realize that the liberal Democrats who want government to be a socialized unit for all is also bleeding this country dry.

At 52, I may do what everyone else is doing at 50 - going out on SSI/Disability. Why work and be a productive citizen if I get penalized in the end? Why work anymore?

What Obama plan? Obama's budget didn't get one single vote in the Senate. The Obama budget was borrow more, print more, and spend more. Obama doesn't care one bit about the financial health of this country, in fact he didn't even give his blue ribbon debt commission of Erskine and Bowles so much as a passing glance. It took Obama less then four years to add more to our national debt then Bush did in eight. Given a second term Obama will add more to our national debt then all previous presidents combined. History will certainly be harsh on the spending habits of Bush, but particularly so when it come to Obama. It will be well deserved.

The problem with the "Ryan Plan" is the same problem with the "Obama Plan," but just reversed - it is nothing more than red-meat for the associated political base. With the incredible hole we've managed to dig for ourselves, the only real solutions involve compromise that will "piss off" everyone. We have to cut back social program spending (discretionary spending cuts just won't do it folks) and we have to roll back the tax breaks that have NOT produced (and cannot produce) the promised benefits. Basically America it is time to act like adults. Unfortunately, the two fringes scream the loudest and thus compromise isn't just unhappy - its sacriligious.

Oh and before some troll / cultist writes "Ron Paul 2012" as a response to my comment - gutting half the government, killing off regulation, and expecting equality through judicial suits isn't a recipe for an America the average person wants to live in.

When a family has trouble making the mortgage payments because one parent gets laid off and their daughter's college tuition is a significant new expense, a rational response is for the other parent to ask the boss for a raise, even if that means accepting additional responsibility, asking the daughter to borrow some of the tuition expense until the laid off parent finds new work, and eliminating unnecessary expenses like movies at the theater and dining out.

The Republican response is more along the lines of forcing the daughter to drop out, informing the bank that the family refuses to pay the mortgage because spending has gotten out of hand, and having the working parent switch from a full time job to half pay in the hopes that the reduced income will force the family to cut back on other expenses, without sacrificing frills like dining out.

The GOP approach isn't fiscal responsibility; it's fiscal insanity.

The Ryan Plan, in contrast, will not get out of committee. Still, the media exposure it will draw to the GOP/Tea Party's desire to cut the legs out from under seniors with respect to programs they have supported with their taxes all their lives will come back to haunt them at the elections in November.

Let's see, now: women, minorities, union workers, moderates and now seniors. The only voter blocs remaining who will vote for a Republican candidate in November will be ultra-conservative extremists and a handful of neo-nazi militia groups.

No plan is perfection; this one is better than the status quo. We're going broke, and jousting for political points instead of taking up this issue does nothing to resolve it. Let's pretend for a moment that this is a horrible plan. Can we agree the status quo is untenable and this one is better than what currently exists? If so, either go for it or present an alternative...besides more taxes.

We have a spending problem, not an income problem. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a fool. How we got here is irrelevant, the fact is we're here, now, and it is time to act, not cry and moan.

The country wants to be spoken to like adults, not pandered to like children

I find that funny because with the way the cons want to destroy education, that is the only way you will be able to talk to future generations.

Tax cuts for the rich and slashing programs for the most vulnerable-- the Repubs are a broken record.

I would take Ryan more seriously if he included cuts to defense in his budget. He doesn't. He's a typical Republican panderer

Eliminate the cap on Social Security and Medicare contributions (making it a true FLAT tax), change marginal federal income tax rates back to what they were in the 1990s (when we had a budget surplus that could have paid off the entire national debt by now), pay off the national debt, end loopholes that benefit a few wealthy fat cats, and tax corporate revenues instead of only profits (while slashing the tax rate paid by companies that aren't just one rich guy).

THEN we can cut taxes substantially.

In the meantime, we need to stop spending so much on expensive imported goods when there are domestic alternatives, we need to stop wasting energy, and we need to develop and exploit more energy resources. And we need to eliminate stupid 'laws' that make it a crime for some Americans to work and pay taxes, or put hiring decisions in the hands of big government instead of the private businesses that are offering jobs.

No plan is perfection;

True.

this one is better than the status quo.

False.

commonsense....

No plan is perfection;

True.

this one is better than the status quo.

False.

I guessit depends on who's paying, and it appears that's not you. For those of us who pay, this is much better. Enjoy the free goverment cheese.

Screw these Republicans.

All you need to do in order to have an affordable healthcare system which includes Medicare is to get the greedy healthcare insurance companies out of the equation. And second to start cracking down on all the companies that get setup to intentionally fraud our healthcare system.

That's it. You don't need to go and try to "privatize" or "voucherize" anything.

Vouchering is the biggest scam out there.

Imagine your grandmother with a "voucher" trying to negotiate with these predator greedy healthcare insurance companies. - Ridiculous !!

.

Norm:

We have a spending problem, not an income problem. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a fool. How we got here is irrelevant, the fact is we're here, now, and it is time to act, not cry and moan.

Norm, your statement would only be accurate if the majority of Americans didn't want Social Security, Medicare, etc. In actuality, the majority of social programs are well supported by the average American - they (understandably) just don't like waste and malfeasance. (In an effort to support that suposition, the most recent poll I could find - the Hawkeye poll stated that 78% of oppose decreased SS benefits and 60% oppose decreases to standard of living adjustments).

When the desire for continued entitlement programs is combined with our exceptional deficit a rational person realizes we can't reduce the deficit and fund social programs without additional revenue. That isn't popular, but hey - reality bites.

For those of us who pay,

Oh, stop. You're like that commercial where the lady wants the guard at the British Museum to wrap the crown jewels because saving two dollars on her monthly cell phone bill has made her feel like the wealthiest person in the world.

You don't pay taxes for me, and if you want to pretend otherwise, come up with the money.

Even the working poor pay taxes at a higher rate than that draft-dodger Flip Flopney, and his kids haven't paid even one red cent on over $100 million in income.

I suppose dodging military service and cheating on taxes are admirable in your book, but I find both activities to be unpatriotic and immoral.

As to that poor kid eating the government cheese, if you can't afford it the tiny fraction of a penny from your taxes that goes to feed that child, you won't benefit from the Ryan plan anyway.

Just like the last budget. Cut taxes on business and the wealthy, and cut spending on everything else, that the American people depend upon to pay for the tax cuts.

We have a ... problem.... How we got here is irrelevant,

No it's not. Examining how we got here points out the obvious solution.

When handed a federal budget SURPLUS, irresponsible Republican political hacks DELIBERATELY raided federal coffers to dole out an average of over ONE MILLION DOLLARS each to every rich family in the country, while adding TRILLIONS in government spending and expanding the federal bureaucracy. Now, interest on the national debt accounts fopr 30 cents out of every tax dollar (far more than the cost of government cheese provided to hungry children).

Had the incompetent Republican politicians kept their greedy hands off the fedral till, we could have paid off the national debt by now, and we'd be able to LOWER taxes on everyone, not just the wealthy.

Me, I'd rather pay $4.50 so that some poor kid can know the pleasure of a grilled cheese sandwich than have to scrape together a million dollars only to give it to some rich guy like Mitt Romney, who already has millions and doesn't deserve anything from me except a good swift kick in the pants.

A grilled cheese sandwich for a hungry child is something I can afford.

Welfare for a rich draft dodger is something I cannot.

So let me get this straight.....the Baby Boomers (all over 55) who are the generation that will BANKRUPT SSA and Medicare by theri numbers dont have to pay a single dime more while the rest of us who are younger dont get the benefits?

Thats f-'d up .

The Ryan plan is a turd

Listen to the Obamanites scream. A realistic budget that could bring back our failing economy, make people like Warren Buffet pay more (when he choses to pay at all) and there will necessarily be a lot less hand outs. Hand ups are much better anyway. So, scream, spin, whine, whatever at least these guys have the gonads to tell the truth not what the Narwhal room big brother watching data Obama uses to tell us what they think we want to hear!!

Tweet-2832581

I know our schools haven't taught math properly in a long time but get this straight, tax percentages mean absolutely nothing as long as tax sheltering exemptions remain in the code. By removing these legal tax dodges, even with lowering the percentage rate, there will be more money collected. If you made the tax percentage on the rich 99% and stll have them all the tax dodging exemptions they wouldn't pay any more. What part of that can't you Obamanites understand?

Common and Moron: Those on the dole like the system the way it is. As Margaret Thatcher said, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of the other guy's money." Enjoy it while it lasts, come up with all the reasons things you're entitled and why others should pay for your free cheese. And when America goes belly up ala Greece you can continue to complain about how unfair things are for you. After all, you're entitled.

No matter the outcome, the achievers of this country will continue to find a way to get ahead and prosper, as always.

commonsense

That whole premise is one big falsehood. Don't know where you got these ideas but they are all wrong and I suspect you know it.

A realistic budget that could bring back our failing economy, make people like Warren Buffet pay more (when he choses to pay at all) and there will necessarily be a lot less hand outs.

Question: Shaking Ny Head, is Medicare and Social Security a 'handout'? Yes or No?

WHile Ryan at least has a plan, its Still not SHARED SACRIFICE. I liked SImpson/Bowles better, but the teabaggers wouldnt vote for it. Ryan plan is just shifting the burden to the poor and the middle class while asking the wealthy to contibute nothing. Un-American.

Notice the best Ryan could do without tax increases is a $783 Billion deficit. Proving that you cant cut your way out of debt. You need a balanced approach. UNtil the GOP compromises, nothing will ever pass...includiung Ryan's plan.

Politicians are like Professional Athletes, they earn the big bucks and with their retirement plan, they have it made after their public service comes to an end. Thus, for the career politicians, there is no financial penalty should they fail to perform in the population’s best interests.

If this is not working for you, if they are not working for you, keep passing this along and maybe, just maybe, it will get into the hands of someone that can actually get something done for Joe and Jane,

Ryan said. "The question is: which future will we choose?"

Doing the same old things that got us into this mess? We've seen that movie.

Deregulation (ending Glass-Steagall) resulted in privatizing profits and socializing debt, with tax payers bailing out investment bankers and hedge fund managers who took insane risks. To make matters worse, these very individuals on Wall Street not only continue to enjoy obscene bonuses, but also tax breaks.

Not to mention the money in politics, the power of lobbyists, and now Citizen's United. We're talking plutocracy people.

Now we know that making the rich richer only makes the rich richer. We know that when the middle class does better, everyone does better, including businesses and the rich. It is a bottom-up tide that lifts all boats.

And what about trust fund programs like Social Security? We all saw what happened to 401ks and home equity, and forget about the measly interest on savings accounts. Social Security is the only thing left that Wall Street hasn't usurped and destroyed -- Fellow Americans, hang on to it -- It's all you have left!

There's no reason to destroy Social Security or even Medicare. Both are easy to fix and strengthen. Are Teapublicans too lazy to roll up their sleeves and fix the problem, are they deadbeats who don't pay their debts and are trying to finagle their way out of the IOU, are they just greedy SOBs, or some combination of these dedeplorable lack of good character?

And what about all the other attacks, for example Separation of Church and State, truly limited government that doesn't forcibly probe your internals at your expense telling you to "just close your eyes," or a complete violation of privacy making you provide proof to employers how you use prescriptions from your doctor, or allowing employers to dictate what health insurance will or will not cover. Heck, they even want to make birth control illegal, and legislate morality in other ways like profanity.

We're talking about everything women have fought so hard for, though 51% of the population, they still make 68 cents to a man's dollar and aren't remotely represented in government and C-level position in corporations. Yet the GOP/TP want to take women back to the days of Suffrage. Heck to the days of prohibition -- We're talking about theocracy people.

How about the right for labor to organize, and to have labor laws, minimum wage, and all the other improvements so hard fought for the middle class? The attack on teachers, first responders, bus drivers -- if not you, maybe a loved one or a neighbor?

Yes, there will be a clear choice for voters. The Teapublican Race to the Bottom with every man, woman, and child for his or herself. Or President Obama and the Dems who will balance the budget in a fair way, preserve the programs for the middle class, and restore the American Dream.

Obama/Biden - 2012!

Ryan said. "The question is: which future will we choose?"

Doing the same old things that got us into this mess? We've seen that movie.

Deregulation (ending Glass-Steagall) resulted in privatizing profits and socializing debt, with tax payers bailing out investment bankers and hedge fund managers who took insane risks. To make matters worse, these very individuals on Wall Street not only continue to enjoy obscene bonuses, but also tax breaks.

Not to mention the money in politics, the power of lobbyists, and now Citizen's United. We're talking plutocracy people.

Now we know that making the rich richer only makes the rich richer. We know that when the middle class does better, everyone does better, including businesses and the rich. It is a bottom-up tide that lifts all boats, NOT "trickle down" voodoo economics.

And what about trust fund programs like Social Security? We all saw what happened to 401ks and home equity, and forget about the measly interest on savings accounts. Social Security is the only thing left that Wall Street hasn't usurped and destroyed -- Fellow Americans, hang on to it -- It's all you have left!

There's no reason to destroy Social Security or even Medicare. Both are easy to fix and strengthen. Are Teapublicans too lazy to roll up their sleeves and fix the problem, are they deadbeats who don't pay their debts and are trying to finagle their way out of the IOU, are they just greedy SOBs, or some combination of these dedeplorable lack of good character?

And what about all the other attacks, for example Separation of Church and State? Truly limited government doesn't forcibly probe your internals at your expense telling you to "just close your eyes," or a complete violation of privacy making you provide proof to employers how you use prescriptions from your doctor, or allowing employers to dictate what health insurance will or will not cover. Heck, they even want to make birth control illegal, and legislate morality in other ways like profanity.

We're talking about everything women have fought so hard for, though 51% of the population, they still make 68 cents to a man's dollar and aren't remotely represented in government and C-level position in corporations. Yet the GOP/TP want to take women back to the days of Suffrage. Heck to the days of prohibition -- We're talking about theocracy people.

How about the right for labor to organize, and to have labor laws, minimum wage, and all the other improvements so hard fought for the working class? The attack on teachers, first responders, bus drivers -- if not you, maybe a loved one or a neighbor?

Yes, there will be a clear choice for voters. The Teapublican Race to the Bottom with every man, woman, and child for his or herself, with the very rich and the very poor. Or President Obama and the Dems who will balance the budget in a fair way, preserve the programs for the middle class, and restore the American Dream.

Throw the Teapublicans out -- Obama/Biden - 2012!

Norm - you might be interested in knowing that I'm not actually "on the dole." As a person that actually pays in to help provide "the dole" I actually favor reasonable provision of social programs and think I (as a well above average income earner) should contribute back into said system that gave me the benefits to be where I am. I firmly believe that we need to be realistic about the entitlement programs, but I also think that all of the recent Democratic and Republican tax proposals have been nothing but pandering. The idea of conducting foreign wars and running enormous deficits while reducing taxes is beyond indefensible - it is approaching deliberate malfeasance.

Weird -- don't know why that posted twice while editing...

Don't: Completely agree with most of your last post. It is the RepubliCrats that have controlled or shared control of the White House and Congress for our nation's entire history. For one to blame the other is silly; both are equally culpable. Nonetheless, we have a spending issue and to the politicians it is never "the right time to do something." Do we really have to go broke, which will really be painful, than to make hard choices and cut spending now.

I would wager that 94% of the people on this board could come to terms on what really needs to be done to balance the budget and begin to pay down the national debt starting in 2013; the 3% on the fringe are ideologues who cannot or will not bend. If the Ryan plan is the only one currently on the table and moves us in the right direction then let's get started. When someone nominates a better one we can use that one. Doing nothing is not an answer; entitlement thinking that is bankrupting us all.

My problem with the "sound bites" I've heard regarding the Ryan plan is that it sounds more like a cut entitlements, transition entitlements to privatization, and lower taxes yet further. I'm sorry, but I don't see that as actual compromise. The best suggestion I've heard to date would set a very unpopular bar for evaluating federal funding/spending proposals - for ever $3 in spending reductions in-acted, $1 in additional revenue should be collected. (I like to think of it as the everyone feels the pain plan).

I'll also say that I REALLY REALLY struggle with the Medicare vouchers idea. I've posted elsewhere on this comment thread that when you evaluated overhead expense differences between Medicare and private insurance plus the profit margins on private insurance, the actual costs in the best case scenario are equivalent. Therefore, if vouchers actually save money it is only through reduced benefit. If we have to save money through reduced benefit then let's just call it reducing benefits and not deliberately mislead the electorate...

Regardless of my voucher concerns - at $2T annual deficits we've got a problem that, as you've pointed out, isn't solvable by ideologues.

Gary 420, Fox News is calling you.

Gary ... "filthy" Democrats ???

YOU and your ilk are EXACTLY what is wrong with politics in this country.

Crawl back under that rock you call home , and may God have mercy on your soul.

This debate really is pointless. Dictator Harry has already decided the Senate isn't going to do a budget this year. That will be what five years in a Row now the Senate has failed to even tackle a budget?

The Senate has no plans to debate a budget and will instead rely on last summer's bipartisan budget and debt pact to govern this year's round of spending bills.

As usual rather than actually putting something out there that might be controversial the Democrats will just avoid the subject altogether while the Republican controlled house is actually trying to do their jobs and plan the appropriations for 2013.

Budget? We don't need no stinking budget? Where did you get the preposterous idea that an institution as huge as the Federal Government that burns through 3+ trillion dollars a year should have some sort of budget blueprint for how 3 trillion dollars of taxpayers money is going to be spent.

Maybe I should say the Democrats wont put anything out there but they will be more than happy to attack and ridicule the Republicans for actually doing their job.

Oh wait, they are quite willing to play to their base and talk about all their proposals for cuts to Defense spending while neglecting the other half of the coin which is discretionary spending. Ooh Hot potato, Hot potato, don't mention discretionary spending cuts.

Republicans AND Democrats need to start working together.They need to come up with bills that will benifit both of their parties.The only other way to pass bills is if congress and the president belong to the same party,but something tells me that is not going to happen.Both congress and the president are acting like most of you on here,always playing the blame game and screaming "But I don't want that!"We either work together or spiral into the next great deppression.

I see Ryan's Medikill Bill has found new life.

Oh, it's the same old coupon, just different colors.

Not making another budget? Good. Relying on last years bi-partisan budget will do, because it won't have this years increases, maintaining the same amount of spending.

I guess they are adding this bill to their accomplishment list... again... and again.

Ryan is the only guy in DC with the cojones to actually present a plan.

Yeah, you are right. It certainly takes balls to propose this:

National Journal reported last week that the House GOP budget, which Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) unveiled today, would “pull the defense-spending cuts [of more than $500 billion] mandated by sequestration off the table.”

Republicans had their chance. They wouldn't do it. And now they want to kill the penalties put in place to make sure that something got done. Oh, Republicans are all for trimming the budget, just as long as it doesn't touch the military-industrial complex that they collect so much graft from.

KMC-289440

Gary ... "filthy" Democrats ???

Made me think of "get your hands off me you filthy ape." Ha!

Gary 420

Ignorant Democrats...

The only way to save Medicare and Social Security is to reform it for the next generation.

Putting the BS about passing a budget aside, Democrats realize the need to improve Medicare, and have already made some reforms, for example cracking down on fraud. What you and your Teapublican Echo Chamber don't get is the difference between the word "reform" versus "privatize" or "destroy."

Reform would be increasing the cap on FICA, means testing, and better yet Medicare for all so that the old/sick elderly are in a pool with the rest of the population who are more healthy -- That would solve Medicare and the broken health care system at the same time. Also, allow negotiations with Big Pharma on prescription drugs, promote more non-profit providers, make the program more efficient, etc. That's reform.

Paul Ryan Hood's arse-backward plan to end Medicare as we know it, and to do so in order to give larger tax cuts to the rich, and worse actually INCREASE defense spending is down-right diabolical. The idea that seniors could go out into the private sector with measly vouchers and buy health insurance at all, let alone affordable health insurance is insane.

The private sector system we currently have is what doesn't work (especially via employers). Why would we want to do more of that, and why would we want to further line the pockets of insurance companies with Medicare funding? I'd like to see the insurance middlemen eliminated altogether.

Can't you see that Ryan and others are catering to insurance companies who donate to their campaigns? What part of all this madness can't you conservatives grasp? It's such obvious crazy talk to the rest of us.

about that -- One reason Teapublicans in congress are against the Affordable Care Act is that it will make them have to use the same program as the rest of us -- Getting insurance in the exchange with subsidies dependent on factors other than being a "privileged" member of congress.

And heck, Boehner and the GOP/TP House don't want to work. Boehner would have to sober up, get off the golf course, and skip his appointment at the tanning salon!

BTW -- Anyone can submit legislation, if they know how to write it and get it sponsored. Of course even with media coverage, there is the matter of getting congress to pass it. But there is another way for The People to circumvent congress, and that is 2/3rds of states voting via propositions--direct vote as it were. But what citizen has the resources to do such a thing?

I've said this before and I'll say it again. SSN and Medicare AND Medicaid need to be their OWN SEPARATE PROGRAMS where the monies collected are (as they were before the house and senate voted to make them part of the budget so they could raid the coffers for their own lil pet project, BOTH dems and repubs alike) stictly for their own programs. We pay into them as "insurance" so that we can have something to fall back on when we retire so they should be protected as such. A constitutional amendment would do just fine to make it illegal for ANY entity of government to touch or use said monies for anything other than it was intended for. Make that happen and give it about 5 years and this would be a dead discussion as it would be self sufficent.

Don't you love it - this little twit who got his college education paid for by his Social Security on his father's death - now wants to do away with it

In Paul Ryan's plan - he doesn't tell you about $160,000 allocated for his family business

Can we now say - take a hike? And Romney told the young women who asked him about their healthcare told them the free market is the way to go and Planned Parenthood would be defunded

In other words if you were not born into privilege - screw you!

The budget deficits became a really big problem after the Real Estate bust. That clearly indicates a reduction in income to Government, rather than an increase in spending. Ecomic downturn due to financial shenanigans by Wall Street. Couple that with voluntary reductions in income - Bush Tax Cuts and Payroll Tax "Holiday" - this increased the income shortfall. Plus some little wars that cost a billion here and there, per Month, or week, whatever it is, before you know it, you have a wee bit more going out than coming in. Do we see a patterm here? The fix would have to be in strengthening the economy, preferrably at medium speed, stopping the bleeding wars, immediately, reducing spending without creating hardships for those dependent upon social care, and raising personal income taxes, while reducing corporate income taxes - this will promote job growth and is part of strengthening the economy! All that together might just do the trick to get us back on line again. Chances of that happening? Not with Republicans standing in the way of the Country, and not with the Democrats not showing much willingness to negotiate with the stubborn Repubs.

Lastly, has anyone noticed that the Democrats, specifically President Obama, are actually only slightly left of Center? But compared to extremely right of Center Republicans, they appear to be very left of Center. Fascinating, isn't it...

True Patriot, glad to see you are a Planet of the Apes fan. I now know we can find common ground.

The exact quote is " get your stinkin paws off of me, you damned dirty Ape"

The ministry of science in that movie remind me of the 15 unelected bureaucrats that will make all of our healthcare decisions for us.

I was in a bad mood last night, and my tone was not appropriate.

The simple fact is the course Obama ( and Bush, Clinton,Bush,Reagan,Carter,etcetc) have put us on is simply not sustainable. Without revisions and modifications, Medicare and Social Security will consume the entire budget. We won't even be arguing about defense and welfare spending any more. These will be trivial in comparison.

Paul Ryan has put forth a serious plan to stem the tide. He put forth a plan last year as well. Harry Reid and President Obama have not put forward serious plans to reign in entitlements.

I am angry that democrats won't do anything. And the guy that is actually doing something is getting savaged on this board. Every year we put this off, it just gets worse.

To all the Liberals that keep wanting to believe it was the GOP that got us into this mess..... Here's your champions, all put in place during the CLINTON YEARS, and all ignored GW's economic adviser's in April 2001, yep, you heard correctly...... way back in APRIL 2001.

Here's your Truth Liberals: If you've got the guts to see what your Liberal Politician's are good for, besides Corporate Cronyism and makng bad investments with other peoples money.

Get an education and escape your locked-in-the-box thought mentality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPSDnGMzIdo

Here's Ole Billy Boy Clinton's TOP PICKS:

Franklin Raines was a Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Fannie Mae.
Raines was forced to retire from his position with Fannie Mae when
auditing discovered severe irregularities in Fannie Mae's accounting
activities. Raines left with a "golden parachute valued at $240 Million in
benefits. The Government filed suit against Raines when the depth of the
accounting scandal became clear.

Tim Howard - was the Chief Financial Officer of Fannie Mae. Howard "was a
strong internal proponent of using accounting strategies that would ensure
a "stable pattern of earnings" at Fannie. Investigations by federal
regulators and the company's board of directors since concluded that
management did manipulate 1998 earnings to trigger bonuses. Raines and
Howard resigned under pressure in late 2004. Howard's Golden Parachute was
estimated at $20 Million!

Jim Johnson - A former executive at Lehman Brothers and who was later
forced from his position as Fannie Mae CEO. Investigators found that
Fannie Mae had hidden a substantial amount of Johnson's 1998 compensation
from the public, reporting that it was between $6 million and $7 million
when it fact it was $21 million." Johnson is currently under investigation
for taking illegal loans from Countrywide while serving as CEO of Fannie
Mae.
Johnson's Golden Parachute was estimated at $28 Million.

I'll spare you the great words of you Democratic Liberal God, aka "Barney Frank" who scoffed at the notion that conditions in the Housing Market (aka Bank Lenders Paradise) were ripe for an eminent melt-down. While ole Bill Clinton setup the banking regulatory's to make himself look Great & Strong, he also setup America for a Huge Recession..... you can't argue the fact that "For Every Action, There Is An Equal And Opposite Reaction".... Billy Boy Redneck Clinton road the great wave, only to pass on the consequences to the next guy.

More of that Love Your Country BS from liberals. Outstanding leadership and profound foresight, from another hardcore liberal..

Here the great Maxine Waters on the idea of an economic meltdown with Freddie and Fannie.... you go girl.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTbIb75JdwY&feature=related

aarpmom
I've seen legal aliens coming in on work visas and bringing their parents. Their parents go and get SSI & medicare. It's shocking.

Then you need to report the fraud. Defrauding Medicare and SSI is a federal crime punishable by up to a $10,000 fine and 10 years in Federal Prison. If you really know of someone perpetrating this fraud it is your patriotic duty to report it. If your comment is "crap you heard", you need to not be spreading it.

Ryan you Weasel when you get rid of all Congress Entitlements and END Corporate Welfare, End the Bush Tax Cuts. Then America may want to compromise but not until. I hope the voters kick your butt out in 2012.

The Monster Paul Ryan is at it again. This time he is complaining like a little baby about being critized for wanting to destroy Social Security and medicare.

In 2012 if you want to save Medicare and keep grandma from being kicked out into the street by the Monster Paul Ryan then vote for President Obama.

Just telling it like it is.

And thats my opinion.

I support cutting the Federal Budget. These are the areas I would cut back: the department of defense and homeland security with the exception of ICE, the department of justice especially close the inhumane supermax prison in Florence, Colorado. I would eliminate all tax breaks for the upper one percent and mulltinational corporations who transfer jobs to countries with poor human rights records.

I would turn the welfare program into a mandatory work program and raise the federal mininum wage to a living wage of $15.00 dollars per hour. I support full funding for education including job training programs because it costs less to properly educate and train a person for a job than to keep that same person in prison. I support national health insurance which includes full dental and vision coverage.

Once again, the Republicans have turned their back on the low and middle class in this country.

Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country.

susan shedlow, funny post and demented at the same time.

The entire defense budget which includes homeland security was 705 billion in 2010. Cutting it entirely would still not eliminate the budget deficit Obama is running of 1.2 trillion. Eliminating the Bush tax cuts would add another 100 billion which still leaves a 400 billion hole. Social Security is roughly the same expense, and Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP slightly more. Of course ObamaCare is going to blow the cost of healthcare through the roof, so in a nutshell, Huston we have problem.

Mega-millionaires like Romney don't serve in the military and don't pay taxes.

Without taxing the wealthy, we can no longer afford unfunded wars, and we can no longer afford the military establishment that makes war possible.

wayne---ryan is from my home state of wisconsin (sorry to say). we produced the likes of senators william proxmire and gaylord nelson. i think if they were alive they would have some severe criticisms of mr. ryans proposals. if seniors and the poor had the power of the war machine lobbyists it would be the military budget and the over billing by the weapons suppliers that would be first on the list to be investigated. these candidates are pushing the masses (if they get their way) to a ''occupy washington'' style revolution. if the republicans should win the white house i'll take that cup of hemlock (on the rocks please) with a wee bit of the irish whiskey to wash it down!

Let's put the defense budget in perspective: US defense spending is roughly the same as the rest of the world's military spending combined. America could cut its defense budget by 25% and we would still outspend the next ten countries combined. The fact is, we do not have a rational need for such a huge military machine and cuts to its budget that amount to hundreds of billions of dollars annually will contribute greatly to the goal of producing a balanced budget. It is reprehensible to suggest we should administer deep cuts to social programs for which seniors have paid all their lives and leave such a gigantic military budget intact.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.asp

@ Granny: I honestly don't think it will come to that Granny. The GOTP claims to be the nation's moral compass, but their version of morality looks rather fascist in nature to me. The president has not even begun to campaign yet, and when he does, the GOTP will see a landslide coming to bury them.

Well said, Wayne. After months of hard campaigning by the hilarious comics of the GOP, otherwise known as wannabe candidates, President Obama still leads them in the polls. Since he has yet to campaign in earnest, yet, it is pretty certain the president will bury them in the next election.

Santorum vs. President Obama:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_santorum_vs_obama-2912.html

Romney vs. President Obama:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

Gingrich vs. President Obama:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_gingrich_vs_obama-1453.html

Paul vs. President Obama:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_paul_vs_obama-1750.html

Thanks Sailcat! I did enjoy those websites. This is just the beginning.

Does anyone else find the bashing of Medicare costs in favor of privatization a little bit disingenous? How exactly will it be cheaper to privately insure Americans when the average health insurance company spends 17% on overhead vs. 5% on overhead for Medicare and turns a 5% profit vs. a 0% profit? Come on pull out the "medicare waste card please... Best case scenarios for private waste of 3% vs. worst case scenario for Medicare waste of 20%. That's a 17% (20%-3%) delta vs. a 17% delta (17%-5% + 5%-0%) on a worst vs. best case scenario... so worst vs. best net equal and if Medicare is actually keeping fraud below 20% or the private companies are seeing fraud worse than 3% the win goes to Medicare.

So what does that actually mean - any savings from vouchers / transition to private insurance are actually a net result of loss of benefits.

And let's just ignore that pesky little detail about private insurers improving profit via policy rescission, which Medicare has never had the luxury of...

Well, let the distortions begin ! At least the Republican Party is making an attempt to face a serious long-term issue of funding and viability. Barack Obama does not have, nor has he ever had the balls to face the tough issue of how to modify the Social Security program. Obama is only concerned with his re-election and facing a potentially hot issue in an election year makes him run for cover ..... hoping the issue will simply "go away".

Then there is his lack of ANY KIND OF FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY with still no semblance of a serious budget proposal here in his 4th year of office. Last year's Obama proposal was voted down 97 to 0 in the Senate, thus garnering NO support from his own party. This year, Obama's proposal is even worse and Harry Reid will not even bring it up for a vote !

Real leadership means facing tough challenges even if the possible solutions will not be popular. But then again, Obama is not a real leader. He is truly, the Narcissist-in-Chief focused only on his power !!

@ Jim. Real leadership means refusing to start unnecessary wars in the first place. It also means refusing to hide the deficit they cause by putting them on the nation's credit card.

Looks like Susan wants to pay 10 bucks for a Big Mac and add another 3 if you want small fries and a

coke with it.

@Wayne #2.12,

I almost agree with you. Nothing about the Cruise missile attack on Libya could be classified as "necessary". Certainly, those attacks were decided upon by Obama with no Congressional approval. The Iraq war was voted on by the U.S. Congress and they had all the same reported "intelligence" information as did Obama's predecessor.

Obama uses the credit card every day he remains in office. Barack Obama is in his fourth year of office and has yet to offer a meaningful budget proposal. He prefers to govern without a budget, borrowing and raising the national debt limit to unprecedented levels. Obama's prior words about this show the very hypocrisy of his very own actions now that he is President.

For everything else, there is Mastercard and our descendants will be stuck with the debt.

Since Jim was apparently self-medicating himself through high school, he must have missed learning that, per the constitution, it is congress that is responsible for formulating budgets, not the president. Furthermore, President Obama's successful mission in Libya did not cost but a tiny fraction of the amount the two wars that were started and bungled by Bush have cost. Finally, the amount added to the deficit during the Obama administration isn't nearly as much as Bush added to it during the dark years he was president. When Bush took office, the debt was $5.7T and when he left in shame, it had soared to $10.0T.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

All in all, Jim's pointless ravings adding nothing of any substance to the discussion except to expose him as a semi-literate teabagger.

Ah, Republicans. Losers one and all.

Rick

Yes, while defense spending is $705 billion, if defense spending is to stay the same hypothetically (it won't, but still), it would total over $7 trillion in the next decade, more than the roughly $6 trillion deficit projected over the same period. If we were to cut only $70 billion a year (total reduction), we would reduce the budget deficit by over 10%. If we were to eliminate the Bush taxes for people making over $250,000, we would save an additional $700-800 billion over ten years. If we eliminated the Bush tax cuts wholesale, we would save $3.8 TRILLION, . In a sense, those two things would shave off over two-thirds of our future deficits. Add tax reform and entitlement reform, and we could eliminate it entirely. But that is ONLY if we include tax increases. If not, our option are severely limited.

If we adopted my deficit reduction plan. we'd have a $4 trillion surplus over the next decade. No, I'm not joking. Here it is; take a look and comment.

I. Reduce the debt by $8 trillion over 10 years.

• $750 billion in defense cuts: cut waste in private contracting; reduce investments in new military projects to more sustainable levels; reduce active military personnel by about 8%; demolish 200 bases, mostly overseas, to save over $55 billion a year; prioritize investments for drones, efficient weapon systems, and cyber-defense systems.
• $1.25 trillion in entitlement savings: Raise payroll cap to 90% of income; reinstate COLA; reinstate estate taxes; raise premiums for beneficiaries who make over $250,000; progressive indexing.
• Cut $1.5 trillion from discretionary spending except from NASA and Department of Education. Find ways to remove waste, trim costs, etc.
• Save $2.7 trillion by repealing Bush tax cuts but retaining about $1.1 trillion for the middle class.
• Institute Buffet Rule and save $500 billion.
• Reform tax code: decrease about 70% of all tax expenditures unless they are PROVEN to promote a significant amount of growth. Close loopholes, lower corporate tax rate to between 20-25%. Eliminate all corporate welfare. Broaden tax base. Approximate savings=$ 737.1 billion a year.
• Reduce subsidies to oil companies, farmers, and ethanol producers by $100 billion.
• Total savings=~$13 trillion plus perhaps trillions more in interest.

I am not joking. Check (http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=vie… Just removing 90% of our tax code's loopholes and tax expenditures would save $947 billion a year. Maybe we ought to do that and simply reform entitlements and we'd have practically no debt by the mid-to-late 2020s.

II. Economic Recovery Package

• Education reform. Increase funding for Department of Education, adopt RAND education policy and further Head Start programs.
• Create Department of Tourism with $36 billion budget to support 150,000 employees to speed up process for foreign tourists to apply for visas to US and make system more efficient.
• $90 billion in infrastructure bank to leverage capital for infrastructure repairs to employ millions of Americans.
• Incorporate policies of Obama's Jobs Bill.
• Offer incentives for businesses to buy US-made equipment and to employ people in America to the tune of perhaps $2,000-$3,000 per head; includes only people earning the median salary that the companies provides for its workers.
• Increase duties and tariffs for Chinese goods to 35% until China appreciates its currency and lowers subsidies; place more cases on Chinese fraud and stealing,
• $60 billion in incentives and federal loans and grants to green technology every year for 4 years.
• Regulatory overview to decrease unnecessary regulations for economy and add regulations were needed.
• Reinstate Glass-Steagall.
• Lift moratorium on offshore oil drilling and open up certain areas for energy exploration WITH safety and environmental precautions and insure safety.
• Invest $40 billion in new R&D projects every year for 4 years.
• Offer more scholarships and Pell grants; prioritize scholarships to promote getting degrees in engineering, technology, etc.
• Negotiate lower tuition deals with private institutions in return for aid and invest more money public higher education. Negotiate with states for a state education surtax to pay for public universities.
• Help housing market: tighten regulations on housing and financial markets, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; create partnership programs between the government and the private sector to buy houses and rent it out to former owners; persuade banks to write off parts of underwater mortgages; quicken time for foreclosures; demolish old buildings to open up to construction projects.
• Increase federal gasoline tax to $.225/gallon and use extra revenues to revamp infrastructure.
• Extend payroll tax cut.
• Reform Post Office. Eliminate 60,000 payrolls through early retirement, increase stamp costs to $.51, cut administrative salaries and budgets, pay freeze, adopt methods that FedEx and UPS do, transition to an energy-efficient postal fleet and turn postal buildings "green," and find more ways to trim costs.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Rick#'s -

Your numbers are off. Defense spending in 2010 was $842B. Source here.

The cost of the Bush tax cuts is not $100B per year. In fact, that was the original estimate by Bush when they were proposed but, as we have seen time and again, he lied! Actual cost data compiled during the tax cuts from 2001 to 2010 shows that they were running about $250B per year by 2009.

The non-partisan Congressional Research Service has estimated the 10-year revenue loss from extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts beyond 2010 at $2.9 trillion (source here). A little quick math shows that's a $290B per year average.

So cutting the Defense budget entirely and eliminating the Bush tax cuts would almost cancel the $1.2T deficit.

I am not recommending cutting the Defense budget entirely. But our Defense budget is bigger than the next 14 biggest biggest military budgets combined! (source here). It is unnecessary and it is crippling our economy! Yeah, let's cut everywhere, but let's start with the Defense budget!

May we please not have any more talk about the "flat tax"? It is horribly regressive, which means that those who can afford to pay the most pay much less than those who can afford to pay the least.

"But 10% is 10%!"

No, it isn't. If you're making $2,000,000/year, paying 10% means nothing to you. If you're trying to get by on $21,000/year, having 10% of that taken away could drive you to suicide.

That's why we have a graduated income tax. If you make more, you pay more, because you can afford it.

Raff - The math for flat taxes is very inconvenient. Under the current tax system, 60% of Federal income tax paid comes from the top 5% of incomes. Since their marginal rates are much higher than the marginal rates for the middle class, it would be necessary to SIGNIFICANTLY increase the marginal rates on the middle class to be revenue neutral (since the marginal rate on upper incomes would go down, the middle class marginal rate must go up to compensate). The exact figures vary, but I've seen numbers that say the marginal flat tax rate would need to be as high as 34% to remain revenue neutral. I'm thinking that would be a pretty nasty shock to the economy myself, but what do I know?

Its not Bushs' tax cuts anymore. They are Obamas' tax cuts and they should expire. But thats not even close to half of our problem.

I am just so confused why everyone thinks it's ok for the democrats to spend spend spend anybody's money!!! I can't afford to spend it why should I give it to them. Its my money if I want to give to poor that should be my decision & not the government..I say America pull that republican lever in Nov

laura- its my money and i SAY dammit no more federal money going to states that cant feed their people, or provide health care to them.

Why is it so hard for you "free love" folks to understand that government is the problem. We pay for all the overwhelming expense to support it and all the perks for those that work for "US" (That was just a little joke I threw in) even after they don't work for us anymore.

If we all listen to you we would follow the path of the Greeks.........................

The Government is not the problem. The Republican't cut masters, such as the Monster paul ryan, are the problem. They want to cut taxes for their Billionare and Trillionare puppet masters but want to cut cut cut and cut some more from Grandma and her Social Security...

and thats my opinion.

Laura, you pay a tax to live in this wonderful country. A place where you can become immensely rich, because of this countries freedoms it offers you. You should be happy to pay your taxes. They are not that high.

Or if you like, we could live in a country where it is "only the strong survive", screw everyone else.

Magnum? Yes a perfect example of what happens to your brain after drinking too many..........

Do you realize that the entire tax code is screwed. Raising taxes on a small sector is not the fix. The whole tax code needs to be changed because for the last 50 years, democratic congresses have been tweeking it without knowing what the long term cumulative ramifications of their actions would leave us with.

We have a bloated over fed government with too much cost and to little accountability. Try the Taittenger next time.

government is the problem

What an absurd statement. The alternative is anarchy.

There are things that should be done by the government, and we should demand that those things are done well. There are things other things that should not be done by the government, and we should not have the government do those things.

Saying that "government is the problem" is as pointless and counterproductive as saying that "people are the problem" or "money is the problem".

Too much government is the problem. Too little can be a problem as well. However, too little government has been a non-issue for years while Obamacare alone has put 1/6 of our nation's economy under federal control.

Let's see ..... a federal bill of over 2,700 pages, double that ++ in new regulations, a massive explosion in new federal agencies and bureaus just to administer the damn thing, and ALL of this FEEDS off the tax dollars of U.S. citizens and C corporations, etc.

Bogus cost assumptions (recently debunked again by the GAO) and double-counting of medicare savings. Libtards love it while the rest of us U.S. citizens await the destructive potential of it dragging down our economy all over again. No wonder Obama purposefully delayed its onset .... he didn't want it to interfere with his election potential !

Bo - Theoretically, if Ryan can point to some specifics loopholes and deductions to cut, the government's current revenue could remain constant. Paul Ryan has said in several interviews that he would like to simplify the tax codes, starting by removing a lot of those loopholes or "tax shelters" for the wealthy. Again theoretically, the wealthy would have to start paying their fair share regardless of the number of tax lawyers under their employ. That would raise tax revenue simply by "broadening" the taxable base from the wealthy. However, in order to ensure that the closure of those loopholes don't become an indirect tax increase, he proposes lowering the corporate tax rates (among others) to counteract the effect.

Again, this is all theoretical. I'd have to see the math to be completely sold on the idea. But basically it's just more fair and the government income shouldn't suffer. Heck, the small businesses that haven't had the luxury of those tax loopholes might actually see their taxes decrease in the long run. And it's generally true that low taxes can spur small business growth.

So assuming the math all checks out (who knows if it will), there's some pretty good logic to this. Simpler taxes, no decrease in tax revenue (and therefore, no increase to the deficit), and the potential for slighter better economic growth over the years. It's not at stupid as you think.

Unfortunately, lower taxes don't always spur small business growth. The Bush tax cuts didn't do that; so I have reason to doubt that any more tax cuts will do anything.

no politician will utter ''socialized medicine'' or come anywhere near recommending that the government should provide health care for all its citizens. many on this vine say ''health care is not a right''. yet all modern society countries provide it and they aren't unhappy with it. they don't have stock piles of weapons to police the world but they have a healthier country (also don't have trillions of debt)----the insurance companies own the politicians and they will oppose government health care because they know it will work and it will gut their profits. somehow the people opposing government provided health care seem to be people who don't want the poor to get something for nothing. spending the money on wars is getting nothing --nothing but debt-pain and misery and a world that hates us.

Medicare is slated to go bankrupt in roughly 10 years, and not one single proposal from the Democrats for saving it. Medicare is almost 1/3 of the Federal Budget, and not one single proposal from the Democrats for saving it. ObamaCare is not even enacted and the price tag has doubled. You have to be a complete idiot to think it will only double in price.

Medicare when enacted in 1966 was project to cost 12 billion by 1990, it cost 107 billion. If that miss with ObamaCare projections by the same percentage, that program won't last 10 years. This country is hemorrhaging money, and not one single proposal from the Democrats to actually solve the problem or even address it seriously. I say lets wait 10 years like the Democrats want, and let Medicare go bankrupt.

Do you really believe what you're saying, Affinity? You realize, surely, that the Republican party isn't soley made out of tyranical fat-cats who want to control and oppress the country... they wouldn't have enough votes to get anywhere. Money only helps spread the campaign (just ask Obama, he's a pro), it's doesn't gaurentee votes that are completely contradictory to the interests of the middle and lower class. That leaves two alternatives: Either you're preconceptions about the Republican party "undercutting the survival of the destitute" as if that's their favorite pastime are wrong, or every non-1% Republican voter (and there are a lot of them) are absolute morons.

Have you ever had a sit-down with a conservative and genuinely sought to understand their philosophy? Like, a real open political discussion without resorting to stereotypes, negative imagery, or name-calling to make your point? If the answer is "No," then you really shouldn't say anything.

Unfortunately, that's hard for some people (and I'm assuming you're included in this group) to understand. People like you prefer to throw out some inflammatory, politically charged comment or accusation and then sit back while like-minded individuals pat you on the back and congratulate your cleverness. In the end, though, you haven't won over anyone. So what was the point? Unless your self-esteem is so low that you need the support of equally biased and ill-informed commenters, there wasn't one.

Would the $1000 debit card pay the deductible? It seems to me that $1000 doesn't go very far towards providing care.

Republicans are happy to have government pay for your prescription medicine, because that money goes to their rich friends.

But if your grandmother ever gets sick, they are going to force her out of the hospital, because dying is cheaper, and not an expense covered by their rich benefactors.

$1,000.00 You have to be kidding. That would not even come close to cofvering what I need yearly.

We should stop paying for health care and retirement benefits for all Republican politicians until they get serious about solving problems.

Come to think of it, we should stop paying their salaries, too.

Vote 'em out.

No commonsense, remove the Republican from in front of politicians and you would almost make sense for once ................................ almost !

I could use a Patton tank; maybe I could go to the GOP HQ in Washington and gather some of my friends with them....

But for retirement?? Bah. I'd rather take the so-called "entitlements" than a tank.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

Get ready to slaughter your pork and beef, clean your chickens, pick your strawberries, tomatoes and peppers, clean your homes, mow your lawns... and the list goes on.

Yeal...

North Carolina is listed as being controlled by Fundamentalist Reconstructionist and Teabaggers... Not surprised at all by the cut cut cut and cut some more attitude of the Teabaggers in control of North Carolina, They love kicking Grandma out into the cold. Of course they have not thought of what happens if the Senior Citizen has no family eh?

And thats my Opinion.

common america- pull that lever democrat and enough with allowing for profit companies determine our economic and security future. No more deregulATION- NO MORE ALLOWING WALL STREET BANKERS BE ABLE TO HAVE THE FREEDOM TO TAKE OUR ECONOMIC SYSTEM DOWN JUST FOR THEIR PERSONAL PROFIT.

Take your paxil, it will help you form you come back to reality. Eliminate "for profit companies" and you eliminate businesses and companies all over the U.S. Then, how many jobs will be left ????

Actually the Democratic senators and congressmen are doing something... They are blocking the cut cut cut and cut some more, toss Grandma to the curb attitude of the republican'ts in Congress.

Thank God the Democrats control the Senate... Or we would all be endanger for sure!

And thats my opinion.

You might as well say thank goodness for massive, annual, multi-trillion dollar deficits every year.

Our country is up to its proverbial BUTT in debt ..... and the level of debt keeps rising every second of every day ! Fiscal insanity of continuous spending beyond our income will lead to bankruptcy !!

Have you ever had any basic courses in accounting or economics ???????????????

Ugh, Jim, it seems that you don't. In case you haven't noticed, the Bush tax cuts are the number 2 driver of our debt, second not to increased spending under Obama, but the recession. The third (or second) is growing entitlements. The most basic solution to address the deficit is to tackle all three. For the recession, I would advise more spending in things like innovation, education, and infrastructure, with education reform to improve productivity. Revenues would come back, and the deficit would be lower. Entitlements must be reformed and fixed, but dumping the burden on 50 million seniors isn't solving the problem. Eventually the seniors will become bankrupt, and our economy will collapse in a way that doesn't compare to this recession. The best solution is one that encompasses both decreasing outlays and raising revenues. We could simply adjust the COLA, use progressive indexing, raise the payroll tax in the future, increase the cap on the tax to 90% of income, AND retain estate taxes. That alone would make SS and maybe even Medicare fully solvent for an indefinite period. But the final piece is the tax code. Not only is it riddled with loopholes, but it doesn't raise enough revenue. The best way to fix that is to broaden the base, eliminate loopholes and tax breaks that do little to help the economy, and raise rates (at least for those making more than $200,000). But you cannot tackle only one. The only non-entitlement spending that is out of control is defense, and we are already slated to cut that. Unless we address both the revenue side AND the spending side ALONG with the economic side, we are doomed. Tell that to your Republican representative, Jim.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

SciProf

How do you expect to get your Medicare if it is broke? How would you save it?

Technically, if Medicare became insolvent, SciProf would still get benefits. The problem is, that either the benefits would be reduced, or we would have to fund Medicare using the general funding, requiring tax increases and/or spending cuts. We could do nothing, but that would just have SciProf getting borrowed money. Not a good option.

But still, the GOP is dismantling Medicare as we know. They know as well as we do that Medicare can be saved WITHOUT privatization. I guess they just don't like it. Sucks for them; more seniors for Obama.

OBAMA BIDEN 2012

The first two words of your post constitute a lie in my opinion. Not wanting to pay for condoms, subsidizing someone's "joy stick" and its "willing participant" does not constitute an attack.

Take reponsibility and buy your own. Next thing is you'll be wanting Uncle Sam to pay for your booze because it helps bring you to orgasms.

Perhaps they were talking about outsourcing manufacturing jobs as Obama's buddy, Jeffrey Immelt has done.

Um Jim, Jeffrey Immelt is a Republican. He got elected because GE is one of the largest employers in the US.