E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe short-term importance of the budget bill which the House approved this week is that Democrats now have another vote which they can use against Republicans running in tough races this fall.
The NOW with Alex Wagner panelists discuss how Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is defending his budget proposal that cuts billions of dollars from welfare programs while saving the Defense Department from a budget slash.
Sixteen House Republicans voted against the measure -- called the Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act -- which would replace some of the automatic spending cuts mandated by last summer’s Deficit Control Act with reductions in spending on programs for low-income people.
Championed by Budget Committee chairman and potential GOP vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan, the bill stands no chance of becoming law but does indicate where the vast majority of House Republicans want to spend more (on the military) and spend less (on outlays for lower-income people).
From Ryan’s point of view, the bill makes sensible changes in benefit rules, such as ending the practice of sending money under the Child Tax Credit to people who are not eligible to work in the United States.
The House vote was part of the debate over “austerity” -- a term that has gained new currency this week as a Washington buzzword since voters rejected French President Nicolas Sarkozy and voters in Greece refused to back a government that is pursuing a policy of cutting public spending and selling government assets.
“Austerity” implies a government sector that’s on short rations, with programs being scrapped, and government workers being laid off.
That is not exactly what’s happening in the United States at the federal level right now.
One way to measure “austerity” or lack of it is to look at what federal spending was before the recession started at the very end of 2007.
In FY2008, which began in October of 2007, outlays were $2.98 trillion, or about 21 percent of gross domestic product. In the current fiscal year Congressional Budget Office expects that spending will be $3.6 trillion or 23.4 percent of GDP.
The CBO reported this week that federal spending for the first seven months of fiscal year 2012 “was about the same as it was during the same period last year,” accounting for shifts in the timing of certain federal payments.
So far in FY2012, the federal government has spent about 0.8 percent less than it did for the comparable period last year.
To be sure, spending in certain categories is down: Medicaid outlays fell by $26 billion, or 15 percent, because the increases in the federal government’s share of Medicaid spending – part of President Obama’s stimulus plan enacted in 2009 -- expired.
The CBO also reported that outlays for unemployment benefits dropped by more than one-fifth, compared to the same period last year, because fewer claims were filed in recent months.
Defense spending decreased by about 3 percent, compared to the same period in the prior year. But spending for Social Security and Medicare benefits were up.
As for the number of federal employees, it is hard to see austerity in the most recent available data from the Office of Personnel Management which showed 2.1 million executive branch employees as of December, an increase of nearly 3.7 percent over December of 2009 and an increase of about 13 percent over September of 2007, before the recession began.
The data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, however, does show a reduction in the number of state and local government workers. For example, since the summer of 2008 the number of local government employees has shrunk by 3.6 percent.
“The concern about austerity is that we are still in a very, very weak economic recovery and this slashing of spending at the state level and to some extent at the federal level – we’re under a wage freeze on federal employees… that is hampering the recovery and hampering the robust creation of jobs,” said Roger Hickey, co-director of the progressive group Campaign for America's Future.
Hearkening back to his 2009 stimulus plan, which helped avert state and local government layoffs in 2009 and 2010, Obama proposed in his American Jobs Act to send $35 billion in federal funds to the states so they can hire and retain public school employees, firefighters and police officers.
He also wants to spend another $50 billion on highways, subways, railroads, and aviation.
In an election year, such spending saves the jobs of members of public employee unions who tend to be loyal Democratic allies and donors.
The debate over austerity is in large part the traditional policy struggle over what the preferred or “right” mixture of spending should be: how much should government spend on a missile defense shield for the East Coast of the United States, for instance, on which House Republicans want to spend $100 million for openers, versus medical care for poor people.
And because the Republicans control the House, they have been able to prevail in some of their battles with Obama and the Democrats over which groups should be singled out to bear the burden of less spending.
Case in point: in February as part of the deal to extend the Social Security payroll tax cut, Republicans were able to force newly hired federal employees, as of next year, to pay a higher share of their paycheck for their pensions.
“For federal employees it feels like an attack, because no one else is being asked to do anything. When millionaires in this country, who have done very well, have not been asked to put in anything more from their pay check, but middle-class federal workers are asked to put in more from their paycheck, it feels like they are being singled out,” said Julie Tagen, the legislative director for the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association.
Next Tuesday the focus will shift for a day to the long-term struggle over the federal debt and the entitlement programs, as former Commerce Secretary Peter Peterson holds his third annual fiscal summit, a kind of Woodstock for numbers crunchers, economists, and those who worry about the nation’s ability to pay for the benefits it has promised to future retirees.
The lineup of speakers includes Ryan, former President Bill Clinton, Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner.
Hickey said Peterson “is trying to buy Democrats into an austerity focus.”
Hickey, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and other progressives will be on the sidewalk outside the summit protesting: “We will be there to say if you look at the polls, the American people are very, very worried about jobs… We seem to be stuck in a permanent level of high unemployment and these deficit proposals are threatening basics like unemployment insurance….”
He added, “The best way to address the short-term deficit is to get the economy growing in a robust way so that unemployment actually comes down instead of just being stagnant. A stimulus – an investment in growth through infrastructure and aid to the states, getting the growth rate up, – will in fact bring down the deficit.”
Obama does not use the word “stimulus” anymore and he hasn’t focused on his American Jobs Act in his campaign ads, but that stimulus proposal is essentially his antidote to austerity too.
Leave a Comment:
It's Time To Take Down the Bird Feeder
I bought a bird feeder. I hung
It on my back porch and filled
It with seed. What a beauty of
A bird feeder it was, as I filled it lovingly with seed. Within a
Week we had hundreds of birds
Taking advantage of the
Continuous flow of free and
Easily accessible food.
But then the birds started
Building nests in the boards
Of the patio, above the table,
And next to the barbecue.
Then came the poop. It was
Everywhere: on the patio tile,
The chairs, the table ..
Everywhere!
Then some of the birds
Turned mean. They would
Dive bomb me and try to
Peck me even though I had
Fed them out of my own
Pocket.
And others birds were
Boisterous and loud. They
Sat on the feeder and
Squawked and screamed at
All hours of the day and night
And demanded that I fill it
When it got low on food.
After a while, I couldn't even
Sit on my own back porch
Anymore. So I took down the
Bird feeder and in three days
The birds were gone. I cleaned
Up their mess and took down
The many nests they had built
All over the patio.
Soon, the back yard was like
It used to be ..... Quiet, serene....
And no one demanding their
Rights to a free meal..
Now let's see.
Our government gives out
Free food, subsidized housing,
Free medical care and free
Education, and allows anyone
Born here to be an automatic
Citizen.
Then the illegal's came by the
Tens of thousands. Suddenly
Our taxes went up to pay for
Free services; small apartments
Are housing 5 families; you
Have to wait 6 hours to be seen
By an emergency room doctor;
Your child's second grade class is
Behind other schools because
Over half the class doesn't speak
English.
Corn Flakes now come in a
Bilingual box; I have to
'press one ' to hear my bank
Talk to me in English, and
People waving flags other
Than 'Old Glory' are
Squawking and screaming
In the streets, demanding
More rights and free liberties.
Just my opinion, but maybe
it's time for the government
To take down the bird feeder.
If you agree, pass it on; if not,
Just continue cleaning up the poop.
I think it is evident that Republicans have a history of not caring what is happening in the long term, they only care about getting as much scratch for their buddies right now at this moment in time. They deny climate change because they think the earth is only 6000 years old and we are in end times, so why would the environment matter to them? They don't care about the people that will starve with this budget, only getting as many tax breaks to beef up military and fund fake wars most likely to usher in Armageddon as quickly as possible. They have shown their true colors over and over; sexist, racist, and selfish. They are hopelessly in denial, and I fear for the future, if people don't get educated and get the right people running the country. 'GOP' is a joke.
forward, it's time for YOUR reality check:
Our National Debtis OVER $15 TRILLION DOLLAR$ and has has Surpassed our GDP.
For Every 1 Dollar we $pend we must BORROW $.40 cents.
This analogy puts our financial state into prospective.........
Why S&P Downgraded the US:
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 [April] budget cut: $ 38,500,000,000
Let’s remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s a household budget:
Annual family income: $21,700
Money the family spent: $38,200
New debt on the credit card: $16,500
Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710
Budget cuts: $385
Democrats are hopelessly in denial, and I fear for the future, if people don't get educated and get the right people running the country, Republican fiscal conservatives, WE HAVE NO FUTURE!
Smmthlg,
I have not seen you for awhile fortunately, I see you are up to your same old cut and paste garbage over and over again......
I am not sure what you are in, denial would require an IQ.....above double digits
PDug19,
You Democrats are such slow learners, I use repetition as a teaching tool.
If you're still backing Obama's FAILED presidency, it's obvious you haven't learned anything yet.
NOBAMA2012, The Marxist/Socialist Experiment has Failed
ssmith: as you seem to think there's some argumentative benefit in repeating yourself, I'll repeat here my reply to you:
You want to compare the federal government to a family budget. OK. If a family were in financial trouble, would it cut the kids' education and the old folks' health care or the breadwinner's BMW? If a family in financial trouble could increase its income, wouldn't it???
Yes, but not by stealing from others.
Austerity, wow what a bunch of bull coming from the political party that got us into the economic $h!t-hole in the first place. And then to add insult to injury after holding the American people hostage in order to raise the debt ceiling. A deal had to be struck. But even now as congress is unable to find the right mixture of cutbacks and revenue increases. The GOP brings forth a DOA bill voted stictly on party lines. That will slash every type of domestic aid going to the elderly, the poor and the sickly. Yet they defend the overblown defense budget by of which that is where their primary contributors come from. Now if you all can't see that these right wing-nuts are using hateful fear-mongering tactics in order to scare the American people in their justifications. Then Americathat I'm used to is no longer the country that the rest of the world should look up to. We are a warlike nation that uses our power to intimidate and subjegate different nations. Now, now don't get me wrong here. I'm all the way for a strong defense. So if the repubs don't wan't to give up a dime on defense and they don't want to get revenue from a tax increase. But yet they want to slash domestic aid. It seems to me that I see another hostage taking in the future. Because if there is no compromise then nothing can get done... And besides a deal is a deal... Right???
Go figure, then go vote...
I think both political parties need to be more realistic. Both Democrats and Republicans will put as much partisan politics as possible into any bill they write.
I have not seen either party that really is eager to cut defense spending. I would like to see Pentagon waste eliminated, although usually politicians will go for the meat instead.
Democrats need to stop exaggerating the importance of taxes on wealthy that will only give us squat. If we want new taxes to be a significant part of the solution , all our taxes need to go up. I feel that it a gross deception on Democrats part that wealthy do not pay "fair share" as IRS figures do not support that. Republicans need to accept that tax rates for all brackets need to go up, but we also need to reduce spending.
We will need to strike a balance. Medicare and SS reform will be needed if our country is to survive, in addition to defense cuts and tax increases to all. Cutting spending may hurt the economy short term, but I think the long term consequences of not cutting spending is probably far worse.
STARVE THE CITIZENS, FEED THE MILITARY!
Welcome to North Korea! Er, the United States of America...
With trillion $ budget deficits projected for the foreseeable future, austerity is a word that seems to be no longer part of the political lexicon.
That is a really stoopid question from a really stoopid faux-journalist.
The right-wing buffoonery and other half-wits have been running a austerity policy since 1981.
If you didn't know that you haven't taken your head out of the right-wing kool-aid bowl.
Man, and no one can figure out why everything is so forked up in this right-wing nightmare society with the journalistic watch dogs having their hands shoved so deep into their pockets they can only be playing with themselves.
What a friggin' stoopid idiot.
Bush/republican congress 5% average unemployment, booming economy, low interest, low inflation, jobs going begging.
Obama/democrats congress 9% average unemployment, lousy economy, low interest, medium inflaton rising steadily, people going begging.
Facts trump liberal lies every time.
ValPh: Obama Dow-Jones high 6000 points above Bush Dow-Jones low.
Would most Americans rather have the Dow at 13,000 or a job?
I think many believe that stock markets always track the economy. Some firms are stating that much growth is coming outside the US. Also with the poor economy and zero interest rates, many feel more or less forced to put money in stocks and will go into safer investments when the economy improves.
Larry: the wealthy you adore would rather have the Dow at 13,000 than lower unemployment: that way they get extra dividends and capital gains and don't have to pay their mails and gardeners higher salaries as there's a hefty "reserve army of the unemployed" out there.
Hey P.P. 2012
In 1981, after 194 years as a nation, our national debt stood at just under one Trillion $. Today, just 3 decades later, the national debt is just short of 16 Trillion $. If you call that an austerity policy...then you obviously have had your head stuck up your anal cavity for the last 30 years. Please tell me you're not that stupid....? On second thought...never mind, as a left wing kook, stupidity is standard operating procedure.
We are beyond austerity. This car is running on empty. You'd better hope you don't run out in the wrong neighborhood, like the one in Norfolk, Virginia. The US Dollar is not the gold standard of the world. Gold, silver, food, guns, and water will soon be the only things of value. Obama speeds the downward spiral, Romney slow it to a hopefully managable level.
ROMNEY 2012
backf: not sure why you think gold will be of any value if things melt down as you expect. If the economy completely tanks, why do you think anyone would trade you something edible or useful for gold? I sure wouldn't.
It is true, food will become the most treasured commodity. But you will still be able to barter with gold & silver. Or you can vote for Romney, who has a good grasp of how economies work, and we might avoid the whole Greek scenario.
backf: I think I'd rather have things like nails, roofing shingles, tools, aluminum foil, salt (VERY necessary to maintain human blood pressure), etc. than gold/silver if the economy tanks.
And I don't think Romney has a good grasp of how economies work: contrary to the historical record in the 1980s and the 2000s, he still thinks tax cuts for rich people improve the economy.,
And we cannot end up like Greece as we are a monetarily sovereign nation and can print money. Don't give me the hyperinflation scare either (I personally witnessed hyperinflation in Russia in the 1990s); the amount of "extra" money needed to keep the government going as the economy increases (you DO know the govt took in more revenues than it spent in April--the last month for which such data are available--don't you?) isn't enough to cause hyperinflation and some low level inflation would be good for the economy, to help us recover from the drastic deflation in housing value.
The point of modestly increasing taxes on the 1% and closing loopholes that benefit them is not for the purpose of giving them the full burden of closing the deficit because it clearly will not come close to doing so. It does, however, clearly signal that all parts of our society are willing to sacrifice for the common good. It would go along way in ameliorating the sense of unfairness people have if the Republican party prevail upon their rich supporters to embrace the idea that this mere inconvenient sacrifice for them now in the interest of the financial security of the government would go along way in making the harder sacrifices those with lower income will need to endure to reach stability more palletable. Gates and Buffett understand this dynamic but something tells me that those piling millions into Rove's super-pac are simply too blind and arrogant to see the light.
I actually agree with you on this. Although taxing billionaires wouldn't put a dent in our debt, it would send a signal that we are all in this together, and give all those 'success haters' a warm fuzzy feeling. The GOP should embrace this, especially if the threshold is high enough not to affect small business owners. But if they did, Romney would not only win in a landslide, it would be the largest in history. The super rich should pay more and all tax loopholes should be abolished along with earned income credit.
backf: while I absolutely agree with you about taxes here, I don't understand the "success haters" line. How is inheriting $100,000,000 from grandparents you never knew "success"???
I don't care if the 1% pay more, but its all just politics, We should all be "willing to sacrifice for the common good" and people need to realize just taxing millionaires will not bail us out. The millionaires tax only gives a little more than 1/2 of 1% which does not seem all that significant enough to make it what seems like the presidents only big issue.
If we are serious about taxing our way out, we all will need to contribute and not expect someone else to do it. I am no where close to a 1 % person.
FF: I'm absolutely in favor of letting ALL the Bush tax cuts expire and letting the Obama payroll tax holiday lapse too.
This is needed , but we need to be sure that spending does not increase and it actually is used to help control the deficit.
I'd rather spend money to protect myself and my family than pay people not to work.
Why is it always YOU who is paying people "not to work"? Why isn't it their contributions/taxes paid while they were working that's paying them? That's the way insurance--and unemployment benefits and Social Security and Medicare are INSURANCE plans--works. Do you have automobile insurance or do you say, "I don't want to pay for those drivers who have an accident"? Do you have homeowners' insurance or do you say, "I don't want to pay for those people whose houses burn down"?
You are operating off of misinformation
1. Most Americans don't pay into Federal Unemployment insurance- it's a welfare check and should be eliminated
2. Social Security and Medicare ARE NOT INSURANCE PLANS-
Helvering vs. Davis, 301 U.S. 619., upheld the Social Security program because "The proceeds of both [employee and employer] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal-revenue taxes generally, and are not earmarked in any way." That is, the Social Security Tax is constitutional as a mere exercise of Congress's general taxation powers
Larry: until my retirement, I paid income taxes that fund unemployment benefits with every paycheck I earned. Helvering v. Davis (1937) indeed held that Congress was exercising its taxation powers constitutionally to "promote the general welfare" in instituting Social Security. The authority to establish the program is logically unrelated to the nature of the program itself. It seems you are operating either off misinformation [there's no "off of"--see Strunk and White's Elements of Style if you wish to learn correct English diction] or are deliberately misleading potential Newsvine readers.
Now let's talk about the welfare kings and queens.
What needs to happen is for this president to roll-up his sleeves and dig-in to work with Congress. All he has done so far is whine because "they aren't playing by my rules" so, "I'll quit playing and take my ball with me" attitude that he so arrogantly displays. This country is going into the heap under Obama leadership so he needs to grab his balls and prove that he can actually be the President or get out of the way because HE'S FAILING..... to those of you that can't handle the truth.
Yawn.
Tell Speaker Boehner and Leader McConnell to let there be votes on the President's proposals.
The Democrat Senate does not vote on the republican proposals , so it works both ways.
FF: Minority Leader McConnell can move for the passage of any bill he chooses. Don't you think he'd move to pass the Ryan budget if he thought there was a snowball's chance in hades that it'd pass?
dslca,
Again..."it's not my fault", "don't blame me", "Bush created this". Just once take some ownership....Obama lack's character the same as you portray.
ANYBODY BUT OBAMA IN 2012.
Both parties realize that in an election year all bill will be loaded up with partisan politics . No folks in Congress really want to get serious about this stuff before an election. Anything either party come up with I would expect to be all politics.
dslsca,
You do know that the President can not propose legislation, it has to come from the House or Senate. The Senate is under the control of a Democrat, Senator Harry Reid so if the President wants legislation introduced and voted on he is the person who should be contacted.
Michael: please refer to the post number where I wrote:
As you refer to me by name and quote these materials you are attributing them to me and I didn't write them.
jerryl: as I have pointed out above, the minority leader (as can ANY senator) can move for the passage of any bill he likes. Under the rules of the Senate, the only advantage the majority leader has is "priority of recognition" (i.e., if more than one Senator is asking the currently presiding officer for recognition and one of them is the majority leader, the majority leader speaks first). McConnell doesn't move the passage of the Ryan budget as he knows he does not have the votes to pass it.
Yes they can move for a vote but it is still up to the Majority leader to make the final decision.
"By longstanding custom, however, the Senate majority leader sets the chamber’s agenda each day, allowing Reid a chance to thwart any GOP efforts to bring up a budget resolution. If one should somehow get by Reid, Democrats could seek to muster the votes to turn it back."
http://public.cq.com/docs/news/news-000004064727.html
jerryl: and at any point on that agenda when he has the floor, McConnell can ask for unanimous consent to move any piece of legislation he wishes. What part of this don't you get???
What is funny is that when there actually is an IMPORTANT issue to discuss on MSNBC only a few informed lefty lugnuts post comments. On issues like what antics a candidate MAY have committed in high school, then, the idiots come out to spew their (lack of) intelligence.
I do notice that the stupider the MSNBC article, the more people jump on posting. Many of the MSNBC "class warfare" blogs usually turn to name calling food fights. This seems to be more intelligence on this one, probably scares some folks away.
Amen Fred.
How many times do you think that grandparent's $100,000,000 has already been taxed? OK, "Tax the rich, feed the poor, until there are no rich anymore". 10 Year After. Hyper-inflation is very real, right here on Main St. Put Ron Paul in charge of the FEDs.
backf: you seem to misunderstand the very basic nature of how taxation works. We don't tax "dollars"; we tax activities. It isn't like each newly printed dollar comes with a little detachable coupon on it that gets torn off when it is first taxed and then that dollar can't be taxed again.
Please directly answer my question as to how inheriting $100,000,000 from a grandparent you never knew constitutes success.
As Ron Paul is not an economist and thinks the FED is illegal and unconstitutional, he'd be a singularly poor choice to run it. I'd prefer to have Christina Romer as Fed Chairwoman.
What I dont get is why all the movies stars like Clooney who donate so much money to political campaines cant donate that money to help the poor people out. I just dont see it doing any good going to the 1% like Obama and his friends. To me actions speak louder than words and in order to attend any of Obama events you have to be top 1%. No poor people are able to attend these parties.
High rolla who will you vote for?
Highr: if you'll do a wee bit of internet research, I believe you'll find that entertainment industry figures from both ends of the political spectrum are generally quite generous to charities with their money.
Well it just seems wasteful to me that they just gave Obama like 15 million. I think the poor need a little more than Obama.
To answer the question on who I will vote for. I will not vote for Mitt or Barry, both of them hang with the top 1%.
I think they believe that re-electing Obama would do more good for the poor than the $15 million could.
face it the rich dont donate to the poor because they hate the poor and would much rather donate to those who will keep them rich the gop heads the list on this dont believe me start taking track of the million dollar commercials againdst obama and those for him i would say its ten to one against already and were early now -i dont see how obama even comes close with the gop money against him romne makes history the 1st mormon presiedent it will happennd as far as the holly wood gang there the same except they spport the otherside why i dont know
I have noticed many super rich give a great deal of money to charities like hospitals.medical schools and so forth.
Anyway, Obama doe not need money. He has been in campaign mode since 2008, and as long as he does not label his partisan politics speeches as campaign, the taxpayers pay.
Also he get free attack ad service from MSNBC and many local newspapers and also I believe get more money from corporations, lawyer groups, unions than Republicans. You don't need to feel sorry for Obama
HR doesn't think that the poor need a candidate the might look out for their interest.
I dont see any poor people at Obamas parties, so it looks to me like he hangs with the top 1%. Personaly I think a fair stimulus would have been to give us poor people 100,000. Instead the money disappeared into pet projects and the top 1%. So just by observation and actualy seeing his actions it seems hes not realy all that for us poor people. Just appears to me that he hangs out with celebs and rich people, no differnt than Mitt.
face it the gop is right on this time to end all the entitlements all the people who feel they are entitled on a government check including my dad my mom i know they depend on ssi and medicare but we cant afford it -add too the burden my sister who gets ssi disability yet fishes hunts and milks us all dry -the ryan budget is correct my family caused a lot of this and romney cuts them off my dad a strong union man another reason were in this mess unions have destroyed america his plant closed basically because they were union and they shipped his jobs over seas some 5 years ago yet my dad uses and abuses us all getting his free ssi while the rest of us bust our butts to get by-go with romney go with the gop they will make hard work pay again
Damn, the same union money that paid for your lunch and bought your clothes. You are the problem also.
Austerity? Since when does merely and barely slowing the rate of government spending constitute "austerity". The American people are beginning to live austere lives but the government shows no signs of joining our party. DC's idea of "austerity" is to just barely consider the idea of slowing the increase in spending. Our idea is the actual reduction in spending.
Obama is done as President. The US will soon be done if we don't address our debt. I have made my preparations. And now I'm done with this thread. Good luck to all you Obama worshippers. You'll need it.
No the GOP is done. They haven't tried to create nothing but chaos. They are striping the jobs farther away. They started this shipping out of the jobs. Giving tax incentives to overseas development. Want to stick a fork in something start there.
Mr Obama has so much support within his own party that 41% of WV Democrats voted for a convict in a TX prison instead of the incumbent president in this weeks WV Democratic Presidential Primary.
NHShell: I'd point out to you that--as the WV Democratic primary was not contested--hardly anyone voted and in such a tiny turnout a handful of crackpots can easily make an impressive showing in terms of percentage.
I agree with you all romney is our next president -back to the bush policicys we go but hopefully no more wars
not a troll, Actually It appears to me Obama kept most Bush policies. Many Bush "policies" were bipartisan and Obama has not really changed much. The fed is independent of Congress and the president controls the money supply and has the most short term influence .
- The major bank deregulation was passed before Bush came in office
- Obama has extended Bush tax cuts and only asked to have one bracket with the lower % cuts repealed that would only give squat
- The fed is independent of Congress and the president and exerts the major short term control over the economy. Obama kept the same fed chairman
- The wars were bipartisan and Democrats were threatening to invade IRAQ for not allowing UN inspectors long before BUSH came in office
- The unsustainable housing bubble would have collapsed regardless of who was president. There were many causes that contributed to this.
- TARP that restored consumer confidence in banks was bipartisan
dslsca - In the Democrat primary Kieth Judd received 57,081 votes. The turnout was NOT "tiny" AND the message from WV Democrats was LOUD - "Mr Obama Don't let the door hit you in the ass when you leave the White House"
WV Election Results
apps.sos.wv.gov/elections/results/results.aspx?
In the 2008 presidential elections 130,000,000 people voted. In comparison to that number I'd most definitely call 57,081 "tiny."
dslsca
If you compared this to the 2008 presidential elections, it would be the same as Mr Obama not receiving 29,866,466 votes, which would have given Mr McCain the election. An intelligent person would call that "BIG".
one things for sure, I'll never have to pay taxes ever again.....
romneys new vision is a america not dependant on a government pay check if your on ssi you will continue to be so but now instead of medicare a government program you will buy into a private insurance where we can control the cost -if you took care of your self and are in good shape the voucher will surely suffice for you and your coverage is insured if you didnt and need nursing home coverage a breathing machine or worst it wont and you may have to depend on your children to take care of you the way it is the gop has to do this to stop us becoming a nation like grease the way it is obama would kill this nation to just take care of you old fools who are draging usdown -plus he loves the gays a evil man-plus we will evenyually privatise ssi so no one is dependant on a government check except the militry and police romney is giving real hope and change change you can believe in
Liberals and Obama supporters have no chance to understand Obama's failure because they cannot handle facts.
Obama has failed .
Americans with brains see that and Obama will be defeated by a wide margin in November. Obama is the only President who has never enjoyed even 1 physical quarter with a 4% GNP--- even Jimmy Carter accomplished that .
The entire Dept of Labor reporting of jobs is a lie. The real U6 number is around 14.6% and that is the standard used by every previous President. Only Obama uses U3 numbers.
Obama , Reid and Pelosi have been a total disaster. I bet you Liberals are proud of how Obama illegally pushed Obama Care thru Congress,,, how it was the bill was voted on without being read and without being near completed... Waivers ? Over 3000 so far and no one knows how they are given.
Common sense is completely missing from Liberal thinking. Obama has increased the Debt far, far, far faster than any President of combination of President you can name. Face it ,, he has spent us into the poorhouse.
Bush was sub par as a President,,, but Obama is a Communist intent on destroying America,, but only Liberal Loons cannot see that. I don't care what Liberals think of my comments because Liberals don't think at all.
you are right obama and the dems will lose but to deny facts and say the news is false is a path down which a hitler would love i hope you are not to foolish to follow such a path
The libs will say that it was GWB that got us into this mess. When everyone knows (except the libs) that Barney Frank was the one who pushed for more home ownership to the people who could not afford home ownership.
Watch the video below.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW5qKYfqALE
like bush pushed war through the congress. lie bush pushed the patriot act through congress. like bush signed over one-hundred signed statements which essentially rendered the opinion of congress AND the american public silent. Like bush forced people to watch him hit a line drive vacationing at camp david for MOST of his presidency while young Americans died in his foolish war? Like bush forced people to accept him in the 2000 elections?...I could go on and on...the dems may not be perfect, but they never sat there compassion-less and told you to take it dry while you spread 'em. (sorry people...pretty graphic...apologies).
After reading a few of these comments (getting to the point where repetition dulled even as a learning tool), I have come to one conclusion: If all of America does not get together and COLLECTIVELY admit that the ONLY way to bring this country back to it's pre-war (bush years) of financial superiority in taxation, regulation, and the fiscal responsibility we once had...we are doomed to repeat the mistakes that led to the recent recession. Even worse.
Taxes is not a way just for the government to survive. It is for the entire COUNTRY! When you pay taxes it helps those "undesirables" (some of you gated community bigots would say) to help themselves where by they can begin to contribute a little and potentially even more. When that happens things like the inflation of grocery prices and even gas would be to a minimum or not at all. And since our economy has been globalized our decisions, which are mostly based domestically are put under a microscope and marginalized exponentially. In other words, we are telling ourselves that we are running a 40 yard dash when we are really in a 100k fun run!
The fear mongering about taxes has got to stop! It's getting beyond dumb. The same goes for Union Bashing (Unions make up for only 7% of the nations workforce!...and it's decreasing). Without unions child labor laws would not exist. Your weeknds would not exist. Over time pay would not exist. Minimum wage would not exist. 401k(s) and Healthcare coverage would not exist. And most people's family legacies and prosperity would not exist...(most=millions). All this nonsense about unions are destroying the country is all about projection...lament...scapegoating. In reality, the reason alot of states are suffering budget shortfalls is that the companies these states house have started creating off shore accounts where they pay so little and taxes which are offset to the paychecks of the middle class. So naturally you will have this ridiculousness of "entitlement" cut-backs and bargaining agreement meltdowns.
*sigh* The causes are clear. American greed, sloth, lust, and the rest of the sins that this"good christian" country purports to be. Wake up. Your next door neighbor needs help. Pay it forward. Do some good. Pay your fair share. For without taxes, this country would suffer and the "American" dream will fade. It's as simple as that.
So in 2009 when President Obama extended the Bush tax cuts and said "it would be unwise to increase taxes and take money OUT of the economy" he was lying?
Nope, not lying, just wrong. When Bush said Saddam had WMDs and started an unprovoked war that killed 100,000+, THAT was lying.
More money for the rich and for huge corporations, less money for the poor, the old, the sick and children. What a great guy this Paul "who me, worry" Ryan is! His path to poverty is wrong for the country. He needs to be sent back to whatever rock he crawled from under as soon as possible.
Yes, the little snot nosed republican know it all has ALL the answers. We need to only realize TWO definite things republicans ALL support and are bound by.
1. They will cut taxes for corporations and the rich (so WE have the pay THEIR taxes for them)
2. They will want war....ALWAYS. They are great at creating them. This makes governement spending go through the roof and BENFITS....guess who...CORPORATIONS and stockholders.
Then the SAME stockholders who raise Cain about the DEFICIT....which is caused by raising spending and cutting taxes!
Which...will throw us in a world depression.
Just think. If the GOP controlled House of Representatives had actually worked towards getting people back to work, and legislating job creation programs, instead of "Making Obama a One Term President" and blocking every attempt to get the economy moving, just think where the nation could be right now.
As it is, the only thing the GOP is concerned about is winning in November, at any cost to the nation. Austerity alone will never work. The Romney approved Ryan Budget is a guaranteed recession in the making, until the nation is back to work. Unfortunately, that same budget has no funding available for any Federal infrastructure programs, much less any job creation programs. The real problem with the Ryan budget is that it provides no solutions for the nation, as it relies upon the non participating "job creators" to begin creating jobs with double tax cuts, including 0% taxes for capital gains. These job creators have no incentives to create jobs, they are now making more money than they ever have before, so why would they invest, when there are no consequences if they do not. They can continue to pocket the tax savings, and acquire more and more stuff, while those living in poverty continue to expand, the middle class continues to shrink, wages continue to go down, as better jobs are not being created with investments in infrastructure, manufacturing, alternative sources of energy, education, or in people.
All the Ryan budget will continue to do is transfer more and more wealth to the job creators who now own 40% of all wealth of America, and who have increased their income by 275%, while the 98% have lost over 10% of their income, and Corporate America, which is now sitting on over 3 trillion dollars in on and off shore accounts. and not investing in job creation or America.
The bottom line is there has to be a middle that works for the Nation, and its people. Romney and the Ryan Budget is not it. The Tea Party alone is not it. The Far Left is not it. Our elected officials need to pick and choose polices which benefit all of us, not just the top 2%. Three GOP Administrations have proved trickle down economics do not work for the 98%, only the top 2%. The GOP has to come up with a better plan for America for it to become relevant, and the Political Party it once was, putting 'America and Americans first, and not just the 2%..
Like it or not, tax revenues have to go up. This means restructuring the tax code, ending subsidies, and special treatment for specific groups, What the Far Right fails to comprehend is over half of our current National Debt was incurred as a result of the tax cuts their Administrations created. Over 3 Trillion of Obama's deficits were caused by lost tax revenues caused by the Bush Meltdown, and not radical spending increases by his Administration. Compare the tax rates of the 50s and 60s with the extremely low rates of today, which Romney wants to cut again for the top 2%, while raising them for the middle class. and then radically cutting entitlements and safety nets for the poor, all to pay for those same tax cuts for the top 2% who will not create any jobs.
No solutions, no answers, just the same failed policies of tax cuts for job creators, and more deregulation.
why are liberals so ignorant?
who is the top 2%
In California
A fireman and a school teacher
A longshoreman and a nurse
Two police officers
If people in the middle have had their incomes decrease, that is their fault, not the Govt, not those who have succeeded.
Tax Cuts did not produce a single penny of debt. A tax cut is not an expenditure. Tax revenues reached record highs under the Bush administration.
In 1980, the top 1% paid 19% of the income taxes. In 2007 they paid 40%. in 2010, even with the effects of the recession they paid 37%.
In 2010 the top 5% paid a greater share of the income taxes than the bottom 95% combined.
NO ONE has proposed a tax increase on the middle class
Federal Entitlements and "safety nets" are unconstitutional expenditures. Any spending like that is under the authority of the states per the 10th Amendment.
Liberals only have one answer: more big Federal govt, stealing more money to engage in marxist redistribution, and enslaving everyone in a collectivist, totalitarian state.
Larry - You're head is so far up your A$$ is a wonder you see anything. Don't forget to let everyone know you don't have health care, don't need it. When you get sick you heal yourself. Break an arm, you'll fix it yourself, get cancer, get in a accident, well, thing,society can take care of you. When you wake up you'll tell them they shouldn't have...
Go back to the hole you climbed out of...
I see that you didn't contradict his statements. I just see name calling and nothing of substance.
as we both know Slodon, liberals despise facts. thanks for you great work here.
Larry,
Your about the most brain dead person I have ever seen post on these forums.....You wouldn't know a fact if it hit you in the ass.....You have everything ass-backwards....You need a medical checkup. your brain is failing.....it's working in reverse....
You should be denied the right to vote, as your are a complete moron, idiot....or brain damaged...
If Romney gets the Whitehouse and republicans get total control of congress, we will just proceed like we did in the 1920's that CAUSED the GREAT depression of 1930.. They darn near accomplished their goals in breaking us starting with Reagan and leading to Bush...bringing us to the brink ....which we have by no means recovered from. However, stockholders and those lucky enough to save their jobs...kept on going. The losers were the poor that lost their homes and the sick with no insurance...and the very sick..WITH insurance and the ones who lost jobs. Next time...it will HAVE to be stockholders. WHO else CAN they exploit? Supply side economics has NEVER worked. The 80's were the beginning of greed and shareholders profited off the LOSSES of the middle class. There were no GOOD times...just a ROBBING of hard working people. And the same people who MADE money off the misfortunes of the middle class...have become a cold hearted greedy selfish group of people who talk big talk about GOD and pat themselves on the back and HATE the poor and downtrodden...the very ones who were exploited.
Even if the Mormon loses the election, he can buy an island if he wants and move out of the country. Thats why we need a president who "needs" the success of our country...and that means when ALL people have a CHANCE beyond slavery to the rich.
China will do what 20 Ronald Reagans could never do...
It will break America to the point of having NO Welfare State, No safety Net at all....
America must go broke to kill it's entitlement mentality.
The funny thing is that if the Democrats push draconian tax rates on the Rich, most will take their wealth with them to greener pastures, there will be plenty of Tax Haven countries waiting with open arms.
Remember the Golden Rule Democrats, he who has the Gold, Makes the Rules....
Let them go . they are not contributing now. New breeds will pop up all over.
We will not buy from them we will buy American from employee owned business. Screw wall street . Their lying stealing ways would be a thing of the past. More banks owned by states and cities.
Thomas: hahahahahahaha. Draconian tax rates for the rich? Did you get that from fox, flush limpboy or think that bit of nonsense up all by yourself? The rich are already paying historically low tax rates, lower effective rates than the middle class and are lusting for more. The Ryan/Romney Path to Poverty is a sure way to put our country back into a fiscal ditch. Try again Thomas becuase intelligent people aren't buying that completely false clap trap
Are these intelligent people the 50% of Democrats that pay Zero Fed income taxes?
It's not the 1%, it's the 50% that pay against the 50% that take....
Let em starve
Thomas - yea, raising taxes on the rich from 35-39% will make them go somewhere else. Give me a break, didn't happen under Clinton, won't happen now. And just were would they go, to the socialist Europeon countries that tax more?
It's stupid stuff like this that gives the GOP such a bad name.
Where do these people come from, a mental institution....What country are they living in.....They probably have no teeth or a job, or place to live and pick food out of the dumpsters and still will vote Republican...lol
It's absolutely crazy.....The rich are over taxed,,,,,give me a F_cking break......