E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSAs Republicans position themselves in their wrestling match with President Barack Obama on how to avert the year-end tax increases and spending cuts, their refrain has been that the president must be the one to propose cost-cutting reforms to the government’s entitlement programs -- Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security -- which now account for 42 percent of all federal spending.
Jewel Samad / AFP - Getty Images
US President Barack Obama (C) speaks as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (L) and Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta (R) listen during a cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, DC, on November 28, 2012.
Despite Republican protestations however, the president has not only made past proposals to curb Medicare spending but has even enacted some measures designed to do so – just not in the context of this current negotiation.
“We all know what drives federal spending is the entitlement programs and so far we’ve seen no proposal from the president – no meaningful proposal – when it comes to reforming entitlement programs and getting putting them on a sustainable path,” said Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., the third-ranking Senate Republican.
In a statement after meeting Thursday with Obama’s fiscal cliff negotiator, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell said, “To date, the administration has remained focused on raising taxes and attending campaign-style events, with no specific plans to protect Medicare and Social Security or reduce our national debt in a meaningful way.”
Republican leaders say they've put revenues on the table, but are waiting on President Barack Obama to give, and offer something up on ballooning federal retirement programs like Medicare. Fortune Magazine's Carol Loomis discusses.
House Speaker John Boehner isn’t insisting on specific entitlement cuts before Dec. 31. What he wants, he told reporters Thursday, is Obama’s agreement on “setting up a process for entitlement reform next year.”
He said that “we’re willing to put revenue on the table” that is, an increase in federal tax revenues, perhaps as a result of limiting tax deductions, but “revenue was only on the table if there were serious spending cuts as part of this agreement.”
To demonstrate how large the fiscal challenge is, by the end of the Congressional Budget Office’s 10-year budget forecasting period in 2022, Medicare outlays will be more than $1 trillion a year. For the entire ten-year period, 2013-2022, Medicare will cost taxpayers $7.7 trillion.
But Obama has already signed into law the 2010 Affordable Care Act which includes some devices intended to curb Medicare’s cost growth.
Politico Playbook: Domestic spending cuts and some cuts to Medicare north of $400B are what Republicans want in exchange for an increase in revenues, Politico's Jim VandeHei says during a discussion on a fiscal framework emerging between Democrats and Republicans.
Even though the Medicare cost-cutting mechanisms in that law are unproven so far and might have damaging effects on hospitals and thus on Medicare recipients, they are at least an effort at cost containment.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA), or “Obamacare,” includes measures to curb payments to hospitals, hospices and other providers by using a productivity benchmark, in other words by assuming that medical care providers can match productivity improvements in the broader economy.
But chief Medicare actuary Richard Foster said in 2011 that “it's doubtful that many health care providers can match or have their own productivity increased at the same rate as in the economy at-large, where you have manufacturing and other high-productivity sectors.” That’s because health care, Foster said, is so labor intensive.
Despite Republican demands that Obama come up with new entitlement cost-cutting ideas, the Republicans were successful in the 2010 campaign by crusading against Obamacare and especially against its Independent Payment Advisory Board, the 15-member Obama-appointed panel of outside experts. IPAB’s job is to recommend ways of cutting Medicare spending which then would get fast-track consideration by Congress. The GOP attacks on IPAB were one reason Boehner has his House majority.
Since signing the ACA into law Obama has proposed another entitlement cost-curbing idea: make more affluent Medicare recipients pay more. In his Fiscal Year 2013 budget blueprint Obama proposed higher premiums and co-payments for higher-income Medicare recipients, cutting $28 billion in federal spending over ten years.
But liberal Democrats such as Rep. Allyson Schwartz, D-Pa. and Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., oppose this idea, saying it would undermine popular support for Medicare among the upper-come people and lead them to opt out of the program.
“This will end Medicare as we know it,” said Schwartz last spring when Republicans adopted Obama’s higher premium and co-pays idea as part of the negotiations over how to offset the cost of cutting the Social Security payroll tax.
Cardin pointed out that the Medicare payroll tax applies to all earned income, unlike the Social Security payroll tax which applies only to the first $110,000 of earned income. “We ask those who make more money to pay more -- for the same benefits,” Cardin explained. “Medicare benefits are comparable for all seniors, but we ask those who…have higher income to contribute more” by paying higher Medicare taxes while they’re working.
Cardin argued that higher-income Americans are already paying enough for their Medicare benefits. “The more that we put these types of payment structures in place, the more that people who are well off will choose to not enter the Medicare Part B system,” Cardin said. This would be “a dangerous path for us to go down.”
So what Medicare cost-curbing ideas are left?
- One idea: forcing manufacturers of brand-name prescriptions drugs purchased by lower-income Medicare recipients to pay rebates to the Treasury. This idea would cut Medicare spending by about $112 billion over ten years, according to the CBO, which has warned that this might reduce drug makers’ investment in research and development of new drugs.
- Another idea: Raise the age of Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67, an idea which the CBO says would cut spending by $125 billion over 10 years, which is about one quarter of what Medicare spends in one year.
But Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., warn that if the Medicare eligibility age is increased, then lower-income people would need to be protected. "Any time you talk about just raising the age... how would you deal with those individuals...who are having a great deal of difficulty even reaching the age of eligibility as it stands now," Wyden told the publication Inside Health Policy.
Then there’s the Paul Ryan approach: federally subsidized insurance premiums for older people, with greater subsidies to sicker and older people. Democrats, of course, reject this and they might regard the election outcome as a repudiation of the idea.
Leave a Comment:
Anyone who thinks the retirement age will rise to 67 is smoking some pretty good ganga.
These people just don't understand that not everyone flies a desk at work. There is a very large segment of the working population who's jobs a very physically demanding and it becomes an issue at 65 years.
The right continues to show up like a bunch of do-nothing grumpy bunch of sore losers. I guess they don't understand their job description and haven't come to terms with the fact that this is aq second term president and not a first.
The GOP is a Menace to the American Society !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GOP to Obama: "We want to cut all the programs that you care about. Tell us how much YOU want to cut them first."
Yeah I can see why that isn't going to happen. Usually the group that wants to cut something goes first.
That's like the landlord telling he needs to raise the rent. Then he asks you how much more you feel like you should be paying and then he gets mad when you don't go first.
.............I got nothing. Never mind. Better not to say anything as I may have met my "foul mouth quota" for the day!
SOCIAL SECURITY IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT. Since I started working, I have been paying/investing into SS, 3% of my wages and my employers have matched it on my behalf. So 6% of my wages have been going into SS for over 35 years. It is not an entitlement, I PAID FOR IT. These a$$es don't understand that I guess, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO PAY INTO IT LIKE US POOR PRIVATE-SECTOR SOULS. And how did that ever happen? Why does government play under different rules? Let's put some of their skin the game and see how it changes their attitude.
It's the same, tired, song and dance. It's getting old folks, very old. The President won 52% of the popular vote and a much larger percentage of the electoral vote. He's in the drivers seat, either get on the bus or get left at the curb.
When are these guys going to learn? THEY LOST! We the people...rejected their philosophy, we said "no" to tax cuts for the wealthy, we said keep your hands off Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid so now the GOP wants to play the old "you go first" game.
DO YOUR JOBS. You know what needs to be done, do it and stop playing politics with our nation's future. You were just FULL of ideas and plans a few weeks ago, what happened? Oh yeah, we rejected your ideas and plans. So work with the President, you're in no position to dictate terms now.
Ok, I"LL GO FIRST. I'll propose the first entitlement cut. CUT MILITARY SPENDING BY 25%.
You guys treat military contractors like THEY have an entitlement to sell us billions and billions of dollars worth of hardware that the Generals say they don't need. SO CUT THEIR ENTITLEMENT by 25% and see how that affects the deficit.
Social Security is an entitlement. You just described what "entitled" is:
"entitled: Give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something."
You worked for it, paid into it, you're entitled to it. It's an entitlement. It's not a dirty word.
Clotho -
So by your logic, those who have paid into and earned money from investments, they are entitled to reap the benefits. That sounds good to me.
And how much do defense contractors rip off the country on equipment the DoD doesn't want??
We could cut are defense budget by one third, and still spend more than Russia, China and a couple other countrie combined.
and the GOP really needs to support healthcare for all..... WHY? where do you think your pool of soldiers is going to come from in time of a major war????????????? You can't have a strong military without a "heathy population" or are you going to contract out security? Which is what the Romans did and look what happened to then.
"GOP" should really be changed to "DAP" (dumbass party)
SS and Medicare are NOT entitlement programs.
These are FULLY FUNDED programs under the US Congress. Just look on your paystub under FICA.
----------
The spending that is killing us is the GOP UNFUNDED SPENDING for wars and unfunded programs.
TRILLONS in GOP unfunded liabilities.
.
The GOP Tea Loonies control BoneHead, is that scary or what !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Clotho, you are correct but the GOP has spent a lot of time and effort demonizing the word "entitlement" until now it appears to mean something akin to welfare.
This is the only thing they are good at by the way, they can't govern and they obviously can't be trusted. But they are very good at demonizing innocent people and concepts. They are also good at creating wedge issues to divide the electorate. Other than that they have no marketable skills.
Raffthegreat, you too are correct, as long as they pay a fair tax rate on the return on their investment.
You are absolutely right Clotho. But they have lumped Social Security and Medicare in with welfare and Medicaid and made it a dirty word.
Provided your investments are taxed at the same rate as someone that receives Social Secuirty.
I say bring on the fiscal cliff, it's going to be just like the Y2K scare, alot of nothing. So the tax rates go back to where they were.... it didn't kill the economy during the Clinton years.
Skip -
Why shouldnt people pay taxes on their SS benefits? By Clotho's logic, they are one in the same.
AL -
Dont forget that Cliton had the .com boom to help his economy. I say, bring the Cliton tax rates back and see how the people like it.
I ask my father - if you paid in 100k over the course of your working life, and will draw out 1million over the course of your retirement - who pays the other 900k? And multiply that by everyone - where does the money come from? Demographics mean fewer workers to pay for more retirees. My dad "deserves" it. He paid in. He fulfilled his part of the bargain. That's fairness. But... The money was spent by the Government. It's gone.
Like Pension Liability, past governments have over promised and spent the money, and now current governments struggle to fulfill those promises.
These promises need to be re-negotiated. Yes, taxes will go up. But if taxes go up just on the wealthy, there will not be enough gain to meet these obligations. So either the obligations will have to be re-negotiated, meaning my old man will get less than he was promised - or we are all going to pay a lot more in taxes. Not just the wealthy
Concede the 250 issue. Its a foregone conclusion. It will become clear quickly it wont generate not enough money unless you go to a broader swath of taxpayers - say 100k per year. Even then, we will struggle unless we rein in the promises made by long gone politicians
Does it suck? Yes. We will not get debt under control pretending it wont.
Which clearly means that basically half the people disagree with him. Although he is the "bus driver," the cash for the gas comes from all. And we know how much those that voted for him pay on the bill....
He is in the "drivers seat" but he does not make the rules. He gets to spend what he is allocated by all of the people, even those of us that pay. So don't get so excited about the bus driver, he is just that. Remember, he is not the King, just the bus driver.
This article is pure nonsense. Mr. O put cuts in Medicare payments to hospitals and doctors (hope you seniors enjoy finding out that you are not entitled to care or get substandard care) to fund Ocare and Medicaid -- what cuts is he specifically making to medicaid????? So the people that paid into FICA that puts money to Medicare (you know those that WORKED for a living) get their services cut to fund others that are reaping the benefits of the taxpayer without contributing. Doesn't sound fair to me (since Mr. O is all about being fair). Work harder to stop Medicare/Medicaid fraud including getting those on it that shouldn't be off it. Since the tax increases on the rich are going to help the deficit AND create jobs a lot of people won't be needing all the extended unemployment benefits and welfare. Right?????
Surprise surprise? Now I am confused...which party has lost the election? Why are these Republicans so unreasonable?
Dude #1.16, Not everyone makes it to retirement !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What is unreasonable about promising certain cuts for tax increases?
Chip, I assume you meant age to get Medicare, not retirement. That horse is already out of the barn if you want full SS. The gap between when you leave an employers coverage and get Medicare if they align it with full SS is supposedly going to be covered via AHCA although covered here just means right to buy coverage and maybe be subsidized.
Pigotry, looks like the Republicons are looking for Revenge ( "because they looked like dumb bats with the Election" ) !!!!!
The gop doesn't want to get the blame for making any proposals, so they demand that the president do their job instead. All the blame can go to Obama then, not the gop. Tell you what gop. You want Obama to make the decisions on the budget? Then sit back and STFU when he cuts into your sacred cows. Why is a MIC job any more important than a manufacturing job, or the twinkie bakers jobs? It isn't, so quit your fuking games.
Start out with congress gets zero pay, and all benefits cut off until they start doing their jobs. Start back charging them $1k daily until they get the idea that this isn't a game that the public will tolerate any longer. Grow up or GTFO so that someone else can do the job that you are unwilling to do.
Enough of the childish finger pointing. Start doing something FOR the country instead of always doing it TO the country.
Republicans can continue to play their games but they WILL take the fall if we don't do a deal before the first of the year.
If the deal isn't done it's going to be U-G-L-Y for republicans in 2014.
They know this and should be in a room figuring out how to solve this issue instead of trying to get as much face time as possible whining about the situation.
Since SS doesn't contribute to the deficit it shouldn't even be mentioned in those talks. I wonder if you remove SS what percent of the government spending Medicare and Medicaid is. Medicare could be cut by billions just by allowing them to bargain with drug companies for lower prices (like every other country does.And even the VA here does).As for medicaid,it is only used by the poorest of Americans. I'd be ashamed to think that Congress would pick on those people.While wanting to not touch the bloated MIC. There is something morally wrong with that.
Roadhead......ever think that their constituencies elect them for those exact opinions? About 47% of the US population does not agree with your side. Personally I think the republicans should just let your side do what ever they want. And please double down on it......we would like to see improvement before the 2014 mid terms. Thanks!
The Republicans just finished spending two years ranting about how Obama cut 716 billion dollars from Medicare and now they are ranting that he won't make cuts to Medicare. The sad part isn't their hypocrisy. Its the millions of people who buy it.
Here is to the disable person living at home, having there children get paid as providers to take care of them.
While other in there family are collecting free money for doing nothing. Free housing, free food, etc.
Why not go after these first, and leave social security alone, at least some one was paying to earn that.
Funny thought , regardless of what they do, I bet you still keep paying tax's !!
To be completely honest, Tag. That 716 billion is actually projected savings over 10 years. But, it is a substantial savings to the country.
Beyond that, I agree with the "..fatone". The repubs aren't doing anything anyway and hopefully the prez will just do what he has to do. Let them try and get 2/3 majority to stop him. They can't agree on how much disagreement they are willing to let slide.
Why do the Republican's continually focus on SOCIAL entitlements while ignoring BUSINESS entitlements? Last year, businesses received 97 BILLION in grants and subsidies from the federal government alone, vs 69 billion in funds devoted to social programs (figures do not include Social Security and Medicare which are funded through separate FICA taxes). When states and local government's payments to businesses in the forms of grants and tax breaks are figured in businesses receive at least $4 for each $1 devoted to help individuals!!!
Hole, you paid into SS and what you bought is insurance against extreme poverty in old age. People without SS or other rettirement will live out their old age in poverty on the streets. Since you have SS, you will not. It's unfortunate you are blind to the benefit you receive.
Hole122000, excuse me, but get your facts straight. Since 1980, members of Congress have had to pay into SS, with the taxpayers (as the employer) having to match their payments the same as a private company. So in reality we taxpayers have been paying 100% of their SS "investment" since we also pay their salary upon which the feds then withhold the FiCA taxes.
Medicare also is not really an "entitlement", since you have also had to pay into that with every paycheck, the same as SS payments. The difference is that once you reach 65 for Medicare, and up to 67 for SS (depending you your year of birth), you still have to pay a premium for Medicare Parts B, C, and D. And they have been raising those premiums at a higher rate than the COLA increases given for SS. Thus, seniors with Parts A, C and/or D end up with a net loss every time their COLA on SS is increased. And, contrary to what this article says, it is NOT just the wealthier individuals who might not stay in Part B/C/D under any changes. Many of us who are struggling to live on our SS (especially if we took the "early retirement" at 62) chose to opt out of Part B, which makes us ineligible for Parts C & D, because we just couldn't afford to have the premiums withheld from our minimal SS monthly income. When I became eligible at 65, the premium was at $96.40/month, and went to over $104/mo when we got a meager COLA last year. Now, with our 1.7% COLA increase next year, the Part B premium is once again going up more than that 1.7% increase in our monthly SS income. So seniors are in a catch 22 no matter what their level of income.
I advise all young people to go to a local credit union, become a member, and begin a separate Health Care Trust Fund to cover any future medical needs (at any point in their life, not just when they reach retirement age.) A sudden medical emergency at any age can wipe you out financially and that is one of the greatest reasons for personal bankruptcies these days.
"Republicans protest Obama inaction on entitlements but ignore previous proposals"
What's new about Republicans? Nothing...
Same ol dicks...a lot of gum, a couple of teeth and nothing more...
Republican states are THE BIGGEST federal handout consumers we have. All states have state government websites that will tell you all about their budgets. I guess the repucs dont know how to research??
Earth to Chip, The retirement age for full SSI is not 65. It's been slowly sliding up and is north of 67 for myself . Yeah you can take reduced SSI at 62 and get Medicare at 65. The point was to raise the age for medicare from 65 to 67 thinking that private insurance will pick up the gap until people retire.
Note to the GNOP, You inherited a surplus and created the budget deficit... I support going off the cliff rather than any changes to Social Security or Medicare...
The best thing to do is cut the over bloated Military Industrial Complex Budget from 4 trillion, yes that's FOUR trillion to 50 Billion. Mothball all but 4 Carriers, then put 2 of those 4 in reserve. No other nation has as many carriers as we do... No other nation spends as much as we do. And no other nation spends secret military spending on black box and black ops projects like we do. Most of the money the Military has is for top secret projects. Cut it all out... End ALL Military Top Secret projects. Give the Military 50 Billion a year and not one penny more unless Congress Declares war on an Established NATION!!! No other nation spends as much as we do on Military.
Also its time to pull out of every nation in Europe, Asia, and the other places. Why does the US Military Occupy the world? the USA does NOT rule the world, its time to bring ALL troops home and close all US Military bases over seas.
And thats my opinion
They were fully funded... until Ronald Reagan decided to treat SS just like additional tax revenue! You do realize that $6T of that $16T debt Republicans keep touting is owed to the SS and Medicare trust funds, don't you?
$6T, invested in Ronnie Reagan time frame, would fund SS and Medicare forEVER! Now, it is just an excuse for Republicans to eliminate those programs! They caused the problem, now they propose to fix the problem by eliminating what they caused! No more BS! Fire ALL Republicans!
"Entitlement" is just a word they use to manipulate the public into associating programs like Social Security and Medicare, that working people pay into over a 40+ year span, with welfare and food stamps. Profits cannot go up indefinitely above the rate of inflation. There isn't an indefinite source of income but that doesn't matter. Wall St. thinks in terms of for now. They need new
suckersinvestors and a new source of income togambleinvest.As a previous commentator explained,if one is entitled to something then there is no question of should they or should they not receive it. Our government are neither the smartest nor the best educated of our population.They play with words until they have those words mean,in their little minds exactly what they want them to mean,then we,their employers are told to do as they say,not as they do.Big business,that are making huge profits are not entitled to be further payed out of my taxes to continue to do business. We are a society that claims that if you run your business well then it will grow and you will be financialy rewarded to a higher degree.If you don't then you will not do so.How can our servants decide that the most succesful businesses are entiteled to not only make profit from me but then receive further money from my taxes? This is private enterprise that the so called leaders of our nation boast of?
TODAY'S SHOUT-OUT TO THE GOP:
We are still trying to fix the mess the last Republican Party left for us.
Own up, stand up, step up, man up, woman up -- just get up out of your comfy leather chairs and for once do the honorable thing to pull our nation out of this crisis.
And tell your Tea Party cronies that every one of them is on the list to be axed during the next election.
This whole argument proves two things. First, that there is no way anyone in Washington today is going to solve anything regarding the fiscal health of this nation. At best, they are going to make a paltry attempt at pacifying taxpayers so they can kick the can further down the road. Second, that our tax code is so convoluted and tragically outdated that anything short of a total overhaul is just more smoke and mirrors with no hope for a long term solution. We simply do not have people in Washington that can put the best interest of the entire nation ahead of what is in their own best interest as is being dictated by those that buy political clout. Targeted tax cuts are nothing more then one party suggesting they cut only that which is detrimental to the other side of the isle. There is neither the political will or the wisdom in Washington to do what is right and what is needed. Only term limits for Congress, a top to bottom revamping of the tax code, and a balanced budget amendment can bring sanity to Washington. If in fact, it isn't already too late.
Boehner must go. He has become a puppet to the Democratic Party and Barack Obama.
As usual pressure will build on Republicans to go along with the Obama proposal, regardless of the consequences to the economy or the people. Then pressure from the liberal media. In the end, taxes on the middle class will remain unchanged, taxes on the wealthy will increase and THERE WILL BE NO CUTS IN SPENDING AND NO CHANGE IN ENTITLEMENTS AND THE COUNTRY WILL ONCE AGAIN FALL INTO THE GRIPS OF THIS FAILED LEADER.
Both the Democrats and the Republicans are an absolute disgrace to this Nation. They are there to represent the American people and make the decisions that are in our best interest. Instead, they have become so divided that nothing is getting done, while Obama is winning with his scare tactics and charm to the people.
It's time folks wake up.
Most of us have been awake, kkwilson.
And most of us voted for the President's plan to fix this looming crisis.
Only thing standing in the way are selfish, cringing individuals whose GOP puppet strings are pulled by corporate giants and the fanatic Tea Party.
All Obama knows how to do is print checks. All his supports know how to do is cash those checks.
Different day, same old bullsh!t. The President wants to remove the "temporary" Bush tax cuts on the portion of income above $250 k a year in the name of fairness to help address our growing national debt. The Republican leadership jumps up and down in a fury as they say no. It's the spending that must be cut.
The President agrees to reduce spending and suggests that the bloated and extravagant Defense Dept. budget would be the first place to cut waste and costs without threats to our national security and economy. The Republican leadership jumps up and down in a fury as they say no. The President then suggests an end to corporate welfare to save billions. The Republican leadership jumps up and down in a fury as they say no.
The President becomes agitated and asks where they(the Republican leadership) suggest all of these spending cuts be made. In unison they shout, all cuts should come from our social safety net. The President calls their bluff and asks which programs in our social safety net and how much should be cut.
The Republican leadership jumps up and down in a fury as they demand the cuts be proposed and made by the President himself, as they walk stealthily away without leaving any fingerprints.
You know, I don't give a damn about your party affiliation, religion, race, gender or sexual persuasion. Anyone with the brains or maturity of a 12 year old can see this as the scam that it is today. Who in the world do these clowns think they're fooling? A group of employees that did nothing but get in the way of progress for their employers would be fired on the spot.
Y'all didn't like the voters' decisions in election 2012. You're gonna lose the contents of your stomachs as well as your cushy jobs in 2014. You were given one last chance by a generous and all too forgiving electorate. Do your jobs now or forever say goodbye to Washington, D.C.
WRONG - GOP BUDGET CUT LIST
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies -$30M • Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy -$899M • Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability -$49M • Nuclear
Energy -$169M • Fossil Energy Research -$31M • Clean Coal Technology -$18M •
Strategic Petroleum Reserve -$15M • Energy Information Administration -$34M •
Office of Science -$1.1B • Power Marketing Administrations -$52M • Department
of Treasury -$268M • Internal Revenue Service -$593M • Treasury Forfeiture Fund
-$338M • GSA Federal Buildings Fund -$1.7B • ONDCP -$69M • International Trade
Administration -$93M • Economic Development Assistance -$16M • Minority
Business Development Agency -$2M • National Institute of Standards and
Technology -$186M • NOAA -$336M • National Drug Intelligence Center -$11M • Law
Enforcement Wireless Communications -$52M • US Marshals Service -$10M • FBI
-$74M • State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance -$256M • Juvenile Justice
-$2.3M • COPS -$600M • NASA -$379M • NSF -$139M • Legal Services Corporation
-$75M • EPA -$1.6B • Food Safety and Inspection Services -$53M • Farm Service
Agency -$201M • Agriculture Research -$246M • Natural Resource Conservation
Service -$46M • Rural Development Programs -$237M • WIC -$758M • International
Food Aid grants -$544M • FDA -$220M • Land and Water Conservation Fund -$348M •
National Archives and Record Service -$20M • DOE Loan Guarantee Authority
-$1.4B • EPA ENERGY STAR -$7.4M • EPA GHG Reporting Registry -$9M • USGS -$27M
• EPA Cap and Trade Technical Assistance -$5M • EPA State and Local Air Quality
Management -$25M • Fish and Wildlife Service -$72M • Smithsonian -$7.3M •
National Park Service -$51M • Clean Water State Revolving Fund -$700M •
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund -$250M • EPA Brownfields -$48M • Forest
Service -$38M • National Endowment for the Arts -$6M • National Endowment for
the Humanities -$6M • Job Training Programs -$2B • Community Health Centers
-$1.3B • Maternal and Child Health Block Grants -$210M • Family Planning -$327M
• Poison Control Centers -$27M • CDC -$755M • NIH -$1B • Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services -$96M • LIHEAP Contingency fund -$400M • Community
Services Block Grant -$405M • High Speed Rail -$1B • FAA Next Gen -$234M •
Amtrak -$224M • HUD Community Development Fund -$530M
At least President Reagan apologized for leaving our nation with the biggest deficit our country had ever known at that time. Reagan said the huge debt he incurred was "the greatest disappointment of his Presidency."
Bush and Cheney never even said they were sorry for the economic disaster they created and left behind before they glided on their golden parachutes to their luxury ranches in Texas and Wyoming.
Don't be so partisan silverton...it only shows your ignorance (in my opinion)
justoneguy,
I have acknowledged and apologized in the past for voting for Bush (twice).
Like Reagan, I admit my mistakes.
As for your opinion, seems it too is erroneous.
Justoneguy, really? Did you actually read the article that you seem to be commenting on? The very first sentence goes exactly like this;
"As Republicans position themselves in their wrestling match with President Barack Obama on how to avert the year-end tax increases and spending cuts, their refrain has been that the president must be the one to propose cost-cutting reforms to the government’s entitlement programs."
I have no idea where your long list of objectives came from. I don't even care. We all know that whatever the Republicans espoused yesterday has absolutely no bearing on their positions today. Such is the way with common liars and thieves. Try to keep up,man. You might learn something of value.
justoneguy- Nowhere on your list does it mention a cut to the 10-20 Billion of our tax dollars we fork over to energy companies each year.
Shesafatone, if people expect nothing from their legislators other than "opinion", then why are they needed or getting paid? I can find all the "opinions" I want on any subject, free of charge on the net, so why are we spending over a million dollars per day on congress for "just opinions"? If there was a way to just do things for the benefit of those that agree with policies, it would have been done by now. Whining that your side disagrees, adds nothing constructive. Democracy is far from perfect, but it is what we chose to govern by and live with.
Playing the martyr because you didn't win, because you didn't get everything you demanded, helps the country how? It takes differing strategies, working together in compromise, to make the decisions in what is best for the country, not the party, not the politicians pocketbook, and not the best interests of their campaign donors.
Any congress critter from either party, who wants to just give in or do nothing so that it doesn't look like they can be blamed for anything, does NOT deserve to be in congress. They were elected to do the tough jobs, make the tough decisions that are in the best interests of the country, not themselves or their donors. If it is too tough to shoulder that responsibility, then resign so someone else can take their spot that IS willing to address problems, difficult or not, popular or not.
We would ALL like to see some improvements before 2014. Either help or get out of the way. Whining and obstructing does nothing except make bigger problems. The conservative right refuses to accept any responsibility for their actions, blaming anything and everything on anyone except themselves. Time to grow up and be part of the solution instead of being one of the major problems. Nobody gets everything they want in life, and they don't get to shirk their responsibility either by refusing to participate.
Boehner just doesn't seem to get it. GOP lost, President Obama Won, so President Obama gets to pick how things go, not Speaker of the House Boehner. Oh and P.s., we are not interested in your vague revenue increases, we want the taxes to go up on the Rich. Once that is done and Boehner can no longer hold the Country hostage, then we can talk entitlements, but not one freaking moment before taxes on the rich goes up, will we speak about entitlements.
So where is Obama's compromise like he promised during the campaign? I remember hearing that there would be tax increases on the wealthy and reductions in spending - all in order to reduce the deficit, kind of like Simpson-Bowles.
So the Republicans offer ways to increase tax revenues on the rich, but now the President and Democrats say it is also the Republican's job to offer the reductions in spending as well?
Doesn't sound like the Democrats are keeping their end of the bargain to me.
Obama is running around the country promoting a tax increase that will fund the federal government for 8 days. 80 billion dollars seems to be all Obama feels is needed to avoid the fiscal cliff. If the fiscal cliff can be averted with 80 billion, then there is no fiscal cliff. So pass this paltry tax plan and we will talk later. That pretty much sums up the fiscal cliff debate. Term limits for members congress, a new tax code, and a balanced budget amendment are the only hope for this nation. If in fact it is not already too late.
Why not just repeal the ban on Medicare negotiating bulk discounts and importing foreign drugs. The reason the Republican Medicare drug plan is so expensive is that it was designed to generate maximum profit for corporate interests not provide medications to senior citizens
This one of the most vile idiotic ideas on the table. Since the Supreme Court made it almost impossible to prove age discrimination if you loose your job when your older you will never get another one. These people currently don't have access to healthcare except in an emergency. The so called ACA allows insurance companies to charge older people 3 times as much as younger ones. Increasing the Medicare age will just add to the pool of of people without access to healthcare. They will be able to purchase overpriced inadequate insurance in the exchanges but they will loose access to healthcare. It will just lead to higher healthcare costs when this group finally qualifies. Of course some may die before they qualify. I guess that would save money
LOL, increase revenues, ya, on the back of the middle class so that the Rich don't get touched. Sorry, but increase revenues is ok and all, but we want the Rich to pay more in taxes. How hard is that for the Republicons to understand. We won the election on just this issue.
I realize you are a Republican and only listen to Rush and fox news, but if you take a moment to read, President Obama wants 1.6 trillion, not 80 billion. Gotta quit drinking the juice.
Rev-1240041,
Good question, the Democrats should propose it.
Why? Everyone not on Medicare is covered under the ACA passed by the Democratic congress. If the age was raised so that coverage was tied life expectancy changes with the US demographics and actual working age, it would pose no real challenge to most people. They did it with Social Security and it didn't have a dire consequence for seniors, they just plan for it. Also, $400 billion taken from Medicare could be used to help with the 2 year gap.
They should. Unfortunately the democrats in congress like the republicans are essentially employees of the pharmaceutical industry
With Medicare you have access to healthcare. The ACA is severely flawed and does not guarantee access to healthcare. It requires you to buy insurance. Health insurance and healthcare are completely different things. If your are required to pay huge premiums for insurance with high co-pays and deductibles you will have insurance but still not be able to afford healthcare. If anything the age should be lowered but that was stopped during the healthcare debate by Joe Lieberman the senator from Aetna.
Irregardless of one's political party preference, statements like this one above by Brenda ought to scare the crap out of you. No, Obama didn't "win" the government, and he doesn't get to "pick how things go." We do not have a king in America, we do not have a dictator, a monarch, a pontiff, or any other government leader who gets to decree how things go.
That would be true whether Obama, Romney, Ron Paul, or Santa Claus won the election; it is not a partisan statement. We have a seperation of powers in the US between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government, not to mention Federal, State, County, and Local levels. This was specifically put in place by the founders of this country specifically to prevent any one part of the government, most of all the President, from "pick(ing) how things will go." Just like the American people decided that Obama should stay as president, the American people decided the House should remain in the hands of the Republicans, preserving the balance of power.
hiap,
Amen!
I find the lefties on this site just hilarious . Tax increases on the rich don't cut the deficit much, stupid people. Obama came to the table with a 3% win in the election thinking that is a mandate, and is still campaigning over twitter etc. Raise the taxes, no problem. But be serious and cut entitlements. BTW, most people get a lot more out of SS now then they put in, as they live longer than the actuaries think. THe age WILL get raised, and its math, idiot.s
When it comes to raising revenue it wouldn't hurt GE (and the like) to pay their fair share of taxes for the infrastructure/resources they use instead of riding on the backs of the 53% for free. When it comes to entitlement/welfare reform take away the subsidies for big oil making record profits, they shouldn't be allow to collect welfare payments from the 53%. When it comes to the ACA tell companies like KV Pharmaceuticals that they can't increase the price of progesterone from $10/shot to $1500/shot just because they can. That would be good start on reform for the conservative clown posse.
TO: RafftheGreat who wrote:
Why shouldn't the government have to pay us interest on our money that they've been taking out of our paychecks?
Pigotry, you don't get this government thing do you. It's not we won so we get to make the rules. It's we elected you to office so you can govern the Country for the People. ALL the PEOPLE. That goes for republicans and democrats. Go back to grammar school and and retake you constitutional education. So get off your Obama won he gets to rule without being challenged. It's why we have three branches of Government.
TO: davsie who wrote:
Do you think you can take more money from the elderly and the poor than you can from rich people and multi-billion dollar corporations, and the only the money from poor folks will cut the deficit? That sounds "stupid". If billions of dollars in revenue from mega-corporations won't cut the deficits, they how can some measley food stamps help?
Why is it fair for the government to take food away from children while it gives gas and oil companies multi-billion dollar tax free subsidies while those corporations destroy our air and pollute our water?
You say Obama won on a 3% advantage, but you didn't mention the additional house and senate seats Democrats also gained.
Bush claimed he "won" by only 527 votes, but that was a lie too. After the Florida recount, we found out that Bush actually lost Florida and the election, and lost the popular vote too, but used his buddies in the Supreme Court to send him to Washington.
Republicans lost the presidency, lost seats in the house, and lost seats in the Senate, but I guess Republicans like to be reminded of that everyday.
American Girl, So after President Johnson had President Kennedy assassinated and then had it covered up, well at least he covered it up, yes Arlin Specter, Gearld Ford, a Chief Justice, one bullet a real laugh-er their with Hoover doing the investigation, I think that was a Democratic thingy, what do you say, there still trying to keep that under wraps. A stolen election Kennedy in Chicago with the Mafia, the Republicans it's just pay back.
What scares me is he spells Regardless as Irregardless and then tries to criticize me. Too funny.
American girl, you show how ignorant you are. Tax increases on the rich solve about 1/10 of the deficit. EVERYTHING must be on the table. Social safety net, military, everything must be examined to cut. We cannot maintain these $1 trillion deficits forever. It will tank our economy and everyone will suffer. You could tax rich people 100% of their income and it would not solve the problem.
Your diatribe about the ancient election 12 years ago, Bush, and about corporate taxes illustrate you have no concrete solutions to the problem . Corporations in the US, for your info, pay more tax than other industrial countries have their companies pay.
YOU don't mention that 47% of the people voted for Romney. Obama has NO mandate, and he needs to deal in good faith.
I am perfectly willing to cede the rich should pay more tax, but we have a spending problem. It's math, and if people like you don't accept it, matters will get worse. We DON"T HAVE THE MONEY.
We cannot raise taxes on the job-creators. Remember that mantra? It seems to have disappeared when it was pointed out that the job-creators are the middle class.
Businesses hire people for demand, and demand comes by and large, from the American consumer: 70% of the American economy is run by the American consumer, which is mostly the middle class.
Guess what? You were, and are, right. We cannot take away money from the middle class in the middle of a weak recovery.
Absolutely. The taxpayer paid for the economy and the infrastructure that was used to make money off these investments, and so the taxpayer is entitled to reap a part of the benefits. That is what "pay their fair share" means.
I told Obama to go to the Toy Factory . . what better place to start early to Organize and Polarize the Children of our country??
Organize and Polarize . . Organize and Polarize . . it is the New American Way!!!!
I want you lying ,stealing, politicions to pay the money back that you have stolen from us over the last twenty years out of your own pockets. I know what you are going to asy, "that was not me, that was the previous administration" but as sure as the money is owed to us you would have, if it had been there to steal.
Fully two-thirds of the national debt is owed to the U.S. government, American investors and future retirees, through the Social Security Trust Fund and pension plans for civil service workers and military personnel. China, it turns out, holds less than 8 percent of the money our government has borrowed over the years.
Just under $5 trillion of the national debt is owed to the Social Security Trust Fund and federal pension systems. A little more than $11 trillion is owed to foreign and domestic investors and the Federal Reserve,
Which federal program took in more than it spent last year, added $95 billion to its surplus and lifted 20 million Americans of all ages out of poverty?
Why, Social Security, of course, which ended 2011 with a $2.7 trillion surplus.
That surplus is almost twice the $1.4 trillion collected in personal and corporate income taxes last year. And it is projected to go on growing until 2021, the year the youngest Baby Boomers turn 67 and qualify for full old-age benefits.
So why all the talk about Social Security “going broke?” That theme filled the news after release of the latest annual report of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance Trust Funds, as Social Security is formally called.
The reason is that the people who want to kill Social Security have for years worked hard to persuade the young that the Social Security taxes they pay to support today’s gray hairs will do nothing for them when their own hair turns gray.
That narrative has become the conventional wisdom because it is easily reduced to a headline or sound bite. The facts, which require more nuance and detail, show that, with a few fixes, Social Security can be safe for as long as we want.
Finally to the botom of the thread.
1. The GOP doesn't want to submit any spending cuts, because they want to say to the voters in 2014 "Look the Democrats are cutting your pet programs..... bad Democrats - vote them out" The GOP doesn't give a rats a$$ about the debt, only how they can use it to get back in control.
2. Phase out all the "Bush tax cuts" and phase in a 10% spending reduction for ALL programs. (surplus to pay down national debt.
3. Purpose a spending Ammendment - "Government can only spend 99% of revenue taken in and the 1% goes to the Treasury for a raining day/disaster fund (which needs to be paid back)
4. Tax rates are never lowed until national debt is paid off.
5. Welfare has life time limit amount and is paid back like a student loan (plus you forfeit your tax refund)
6. Medicare and Obamacare combine into one program. Provides basic health care. If you want the private room, flowers on the table - buy a private insurance plan.
7. If government doesn't create jobs, then the GOP will have no problem with a 20% defense cut in spending.
8. Stop giving away leases to federal land. Lumber, Oil and Cattlemen need to pay more for the value of the resources that they take and then turn around and make gross amounts of profits on.
The GOP swore before America during the 2012 elections that Obama and Democrats had cut $716 Billion from Medicare. Now, I never believed Republicans for a minute. Never the less, if they were telling the truth. Why would they now claim Obama hasn't offered any cuts to Medicare before a Fiscal Cliff deal can be reached???? I thought.....according to them (GOP)....Obama had already cut $716 Billion from Medicare from Obamacare???? Republicans are bunch of F'n Liars..........
Government earned insurance benefit programs will be a continuum if the unreasonable profits of insurance companies is taken out of Medicare. Also, incorporating the prescription drug cost of the VA into Medicare will lower its cost without raising eligibility age.
Social Security remains solvent for the next 75 years if the FICA taxed wages are raised from 83% to 90%, and is not privatized.
Medicaid can be looked at for cost savings without turning it over to the states.
Cutting defense spending can be done when future defense priorities are made and alliances identified.
Eliminating obsolete Cold War units and technologies can result in eliminating wasteful defense spending.
The real voice of the GOP is Rush Limbaugh, not Orange Head !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The real GOP leader is Grover Norquist, not ... Mitch McChicken, not ... Mitt Romnesia, not... the Constantly Crying House S-Beaker Chicken Boner.
Hey AlaskaGirl-759554 #1.3--- Let me help you here,after reading the same old crap for over a year now,I say lets go off the F'n cliff. I am sick of listening to 535 self centered,egoistical,self righteous,greedy,lying bastards. History will or likely repeat itself,and we have no one to blame but ourselves. By the way,these broads sound just like Congress.
The GOP is still trying to play games with the President of the United States and the American People.
Republicans act as if nobody knows that they have said "NO" to everything the President has presented to them in the past, so now they again want the President to provide plans to them, so that they can say "NO" again.
That's a really stupid game Mitch McConnell, and the American People are NOT finding it humorous at all!
While I am not so naive to believe money will make anyone happy I for one would be happy with enough to pay my everyday household expenses. Most of us in America have much more than 90% of the worlds population. Plus the amount would change as the income goes up, it is the way of the rich and powerful. They will never intenionally allow anyone to become so wealthy that they cannot control their actions in some way. When the national average income goes up they raise the cost of everything they can to take it away. If you earn eighty thousand dollars a year and you seem to be capturing some relief from debt, the next thing you see will be and increase in some local or national tax, or the cost of food,gas,clothing,utilities and many things of which you cannot have control of. Americans are really stupid to believe that we are in control of our own lives. You are given just enough rope to keep you calm. Have you not noticed how when the price of fuel goes up each and every day nothing is said until a certain ceiling has been reached, then people start screaming for the government to do something and look what happens, the price starts to go down and continues to go down for a while until the screaming stops then it starts to edge up again. Are you so stupid to believe that this is not a planed occurence. Unless you do hit the lottery and become wealthy overnight, your income is very carefully controlled, and even then the powers that be take 25 to 30 percent of your winnings just because they want to, they did not work for the money to buy that ticket, they actually had already taxed the money you spent to buy the ticket, and after that they take more and more as you spend it. Anerica, where the rich and powerful people inside and outside of the government are controlling and manipulating three hundred million people, kind of sounds like china doesn't it. The federal reserve bank of which is a private owned unity, owns America, they alone could destroy this nation in one day.
An actor tells us Mr. Obama is “lord and savior”. An artist depicts him as the crucified Jesus, crown of thorns included. Not long ago Obama joked he was not born in a manger. We still don’t know where he was born. He can work miracles however. Six million evangelicals voted for him, even though he endorses the practice of murdering babies who survive abortion. Steve and Ted can repeat “vows” in the Army and it is called “marriage.” Big Brother has replaced God, and people applaud, heralding their jailer.
Recession, unemployment and poverty hit the poor and the young and people of color hardest, yet still, they think he walks on water. His pastor, his wife, his parents, his grandparents, all his close friends and associates, his professors and all his mentors are communists, but voters believe he is a patriot, just a good old American liberal. He denies Christ, embraces Mohammed, and every other religious tradition as an expressed universalist, then tells the world he is a Christian, even as he persecutes Christians, and no one holds him accountable. If he says it, the media believes it.
His blasphemies are called blessings. He promotes Hamas and the Muslim Bros. who attack Israel with 2,000 missiles. He claims to be pro-Israel, cries out for peace after waging war, says nothing as Egypt becomes a Sunni version of Iran, and still, they say he deserves the Nobel Peace Prize. He takes credit for killing bin Laden where none is due, uses it to get re-elected, brags about it over and over, provoking retaliatory attacks against Americans, resulting in death. He takes no responsibility, denies wrongdoing, and is heralded a great leader.
Our people in Benghazi cry out for rescue. He ignores their cries and watches them die, live, facing their parents without remorse, lying to the American people without conscience. And still, he is not held accountable. He promotes tyranny, dismantles liberty, violates the Constitution, misleads the public, condemns all opposition, and betrays friends, without any penalty.
He mortgages our children’s futures, defaults, refinances on borrowed time, driving them deeper into debt, defaults again, blames Republicans, then summons Romney for a nice sit down.
Next Joe Biden will tell us Obama gives sight to the blind, raises the dead and forgives sins, even within the Democrat Party.
Now that would be a miracle.
(“I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give an account for every thoughtless word they have uttered.” Matthew 12:36)
The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism" they will adopt every fragmentof the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation without knowing how it happened.
Norman Thomas, U.S.Socialist Presidential Candidate 1944
We sent a man to the moon, but we can't come up with a way to provide for our own AND reduce costs? Really? There HAS to be a way. Think outside the lobbyist box.
The problem with Congress is OrangeHead spends to much of his time at the 19th hole, alcoholism is no joke, note to the GOP " your Pumpkinhead needs help !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We sent the wrong men. Should have sent Rush, Glen and Grover. One way.
Obama took care of the space problem by cancelling it.
Now if he could only take care of the space problem between his ears we might just have a chance.
@armurry: The space program was canceled by the Bush administration long before Obama took office. The space shuttle was a "truck" to build and supply the international space station and was not intended as a long term program. Bush decided not to continue alternatives hoping the private sector picks up the slack.
I love when the righties blame Obama for what the the GOP did. It shows you guys just don't pay attention to what's happening in the real world.
"Cardin pointed out that the Medicare payroll tax applies to all earned income, unlike the Social Security payroll tax which applies only to the first $110,000 of earned income."
So in reality, it is the lower income folks earning under $110,000/yr that are the ones paying the higher premiums. So why would it be asking too much for higher income earners to pay more in premiums?
I don't really agree with that approach myself, I would rather see the $110,000 cap removed, or changed. I don't know what the right numbers or figures are, but lets at least look at all the real options.
And, do you really think that if they "higher earners" had to pay a little more in premiums, they would "opt out" as Cardin is suggesting? For some reason, I highly doubt that!
The thing is too, that most high earners have less physically less demanding jobs. They tend to be healthier because they haven't abused their bodies for their employers their whole lives. I see no reason for caps on SS or Medicare. These programs were developed with the middle and lower class in mind.
I have worked for forty years and paid into these programs. With the exception of maybe one or two years I have reached and gone beyond the cap in earnings and have paid a lot of money into Medicare too. But I would have been fine not capping out on SS. Sure, it was nice to see a "raise" in take home pay toward the end of every year, but in reality, I wouldn't have missed it. When I get a bit older and start drawing on these programs, I have no problem understanding that my neighbors who worked crappy jobs and paid in far less, are just a eligible as I am. They worked hard nonetheless, even if they didn't get paid as much. But even when you look at it statistically, people who earn less money tend to have shorter lifespans than those who earn a lot. They may have put in less, but they take out less too.
They way I see it is that if life in this country has treated you well financially, you owe a little bit to those less fortunate. We're all in this together and if at the ends of their lives, if some need more help than others, why is it somehow appropriate to deny them? On the whole, our country has done very, very well. Why should only select people enjoy the benefits of the group success?
1 New Day / I do not know to which religious denomination you belong , but I must say Thank You for showing me at least one true Christian!
listoire,
Although I call myself Christian, in that I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ, I don't belong to any religious denomination. As a child I was, but the way I see it, religious denominations are what screws up a good thing. I think the Bible can be a "reference" book of sorts, but don't regard it as "the word of God". The old testament is a collection of mostly mythical stories that in some cases may be loosely tied to real events, but the stories were used to teach people lessons and keep them in line. The new testament is for the most part, the chronicles of a man named Jesus. Although many refuse to see it, the teachings of Christ tend to really contradict many of the old stories. I don't take most of the bible as being literal and I think when you do, you are only confusing what the real messages are about.
I think there is most likely some type of God, but not in the traditional sense. There can be no such thing as vengeful God. It just makes no sense. God may very well be some presence within all of us and we personally need to acknowledge it to understand it. It is really about how we look at and interact with others. It's not about religion. God is not some all powerful supernatural being that rewards good and punishes evil. That is something we do to ourselves. If you look around the world, sometimes good gets punished and evil gets rewarded. An all powerful, infallible God wouldn't allow that. But we as people do. That's because we are fallible. Human free will, wouldn't be free will any other way, if a God intervened.
You don't need to be religious to have a lot of God in you. In fact some time religion just makes it harder. Although you are not always rewarded by doing so, being nice to others feels good. There are times when someone elses suffering or some vengeful act, sort of feels good for awhile, but it isn't as good as the reverse. There is a lot of evil in the world, but I don't see that as the work of some satanic being. Evil is something also demonstrated by man. I think we all have the inate ability to do either good or evil. Some delude themselves into thinking that evil behavior can somehow be good. I don't think it ever is, but there may be times when it may be necessary. But necesity never makes it good. If we want to foster good behaivior, we do better by teaching with good behavior examples. Trying to teach good behavior by using evil behavior will just have the opposite effect.
All that said, you don't need religion. All you need is one principle to guide you. Love thy neighbor as yourself. That is what being Christian is all about and all the rest of is so much noise to help justify our human infallibility.
@Idiot: The tax on someone earning $5,000 per week ($250,000.00/yr) is an additional $134.00 per week to what they are already paying in taxes. It's a nice lunch for two. If you put the burden on the poor and middle class to make up the difference, it's a weeks' worth of food or more. So I agree, the rich would still be rich and they will know where they are at and start hiring again. All of this posturing by the GOP (and they have NO leverage) is just a show and STILL hurting 98% of the United States. Unforgivable.
Obstructionists
LOL - yes, the Dems certainly are. Oh, if it's the Reps you're referring to, they are the ONLY thing standing in the way of Barry and the Dems raising taxes while not cutting spending. Talk about a stupid thing to wish for.
Fiscal cliff my butt: every time Congress cries 'wolf', we get fleeced.
Come On George,
Proposals have been submitted that are reasonable. It's always the same ol "I'm taking my toys and going home".
That was funny Peter King (R) calling Grover Norquist a Lowlife on CBS !!!!!!!!!
George,
wake up and smell the coffee. The sequester that is about to kick in was passed by Congress, not Obama. All he did was sign it. Furthermore, Mr. Baner stated with a big smile on his face that he "got 90 something% of what he wanted" in the negotiations that led to the agreement called the sequester. the taxes will go up on Jan. !st. PERIOD. The only question is whether it goes up for everyone or just the top 2%!!!
THIS SHOULD BE A VERY SIMPLE CONCEPT TO ABSORB- EVEN FOR A REPUGNICAN.
And this tax increase comes to us cortesy of the repugs- not the dems. The dems could do nothing in that house without the 'pugs. Read your history and weep. THIS IS A GOP TAX INCREASE, NOT A DEMOCRAT TAX INCREASE.
'Reasonable'? $1.6 TRILLION in new taxes, no assurance of spending cuts - that's reasonable? Look, there is NOT a revenue problem. (And why is 'revenue' always mean 'tax' to Dems?) There is a spending problem.
How about we all agree to stop kicking the can down the road. Let housing do what it may. Go with a flax tax. Eliminate ALL tax deductions. Implement a VAT: you buy, you pay. Of course the libs won't go for this: too simple and makes too much sense.
Look, our politicians - Reps included - have put us into a precarious position again. Not the first time, won't be the last. But every time the buffoons in Washington yell fire, Dems want to raise taxes. Makes no sense.
George, the stated goal of the White House is to cut $2.50 in spending for every $1.00 in new taxes. That translated into 4 trillion in cuts for the 1.6 in taxes.
Tag -
That cut is in proposed future spending, not current spending. What Obama and liberals fail to understand is that it is the current spending levels which are unsustainable, let alone future spending levels.
By the way, cutting the future rate of increase means absolutely nothing as future spending still increases, just not at the rate Obama and liberals would like. The debt would still continue to grow at its present rate and then some.
It's a good thing we elected people to office who want to govern in the best interest of the party and not the people of the Country, could you imagine where we would be if they took the best interest of the Country into consideration. The President who is in his last term is the worst he is still working on a Democratic agenda when he should be working on no agenda, he has no office to run for, but he does have a party to support.
Republicans will say anything and do anything to protect the rich.
They are just obstructing anything that will help the economy, just as they have for the past 4 years.
Time to go, Republicans!
Republicans are now trying to deflect themselves from any entitlement cost cutting. They want it, but they don't want to do it themselves. They don't want to take any of the criticism that might come from it and, most of all, they want to be in a "position" to say the Democrats did it. Republicans are pitifully transparent.
LOL - you have no clue what you're talking about.
GOP the party of the Rich for the Rich !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
George, perhaps you're the one who doesn't know. Too much fox/limbaugh
no class warfare here (sarc).. thought this president said he could work across the isle, thought this pres promised to cut the debt in half.. thought this pres said borrowing from china was unamerica!!! what a liar-in-chief....he has no intention if EVER cutting our debt!! ever!!! 47% of the fed income goes to welfare of some sort? over 65 yrs old doesnt count.... what about all those sycophants?..no able bodied younger american should get welfare..especially not generational.. temp welfare, in a pinch, but not forever, and def.. with drug testing..
No Comment !!!
To which "isle" do you refer? Oahu?
Two types of republicans the one percent and the suckers.
yeah repubublican take a hike
All our "leaders" can do is blame-storm and finger-point. No one has the stones to do what must be done.
The majority of the electorate doesn't have the stones to accept what must be done!
They just want what they were promised.
The GOP was voted into office to serve the people, not the Norquist pledge !!!!!!!!!
You would think after the beating they took in the election, that the Republicans might get a clue that the American public sees through their political theatrics and is just a smidgeon sick of it. Unless they want to lose ALL the House in 2014, they'd better get their act together and get something meaningful done.
LOL - beating? Reps control 30 governorships and the House of Reps. Sadly, we lost the WH, but will get it back after 4 more terrible years under Barry.
"Wait 'til next year!"
--Every Cubs fan, ever
Yep....Come 2014 vote the do nothings out!!!! Even with all the gerrymandering the GOP has done to insure that they retain seats will help if the majority vote these parasites out!!!!
Let the fools show their true colors by sitting on their hands and doing nothing!!!!
2014 wont do anything but further strengthen the Republican presence in the Senate and House. It will be a repeat of 2010, mark my words.
If the repubs refuse to compromise and drive us over the fiscal cliff, voters will remember. the majority wants the repubs to compromise, most of us support Obama's proposal on taxes. People are tired of worthless conservative ideology and want congress to act based on how to make things better, not to follow tired old political dogma.
We have a HUGE spending problem. Let's go 'over the cliff'. Nothing is going to happen. TARP, QE 1, 2, and 3, bank bailouts, S & L debacle, etc. There is no fiscal emergency - and if there is, it's the Dems and Barry's fault.
HEY, STUPID DEMS, YOU HAVE CONTROLLED THE SENATE FOR YEARS, THE WHITE HOUSE FOR ALMOST 4 YEARS - AND STILL HAVE NOT PASSED A BUDGET.
Even when you had control of the Senate, House and White House, you Dems didn't/couldn't pass a budget. Get a clue.
We are $16,000,000,000,000 in debt and rising fast thanks to out of control spending. It is time to stop kicking the can down the road.
all I can say is CA, IL, Detroit, Chicago, the list goes on and on. They truely do, know about economics!
Go look up some real facts and stop listening to fox/limbaugh. Find out where that 16 trillion debt came from . It won't be what you think but it's easier to listen to the fox/limbaugh fantasies.
Bill -
$4T came from Bush, $6T came from Obama and the rest came from previous presidents. You spout off party lines yet you cant even make any sensible argument for why Congress/Obama couldnt pass a budget when they had the majorities in both parties.
George-
Isn't that exactly what the Bush Administration did?
Isn't that why we are in the mess we are in?
Listening to Rush/Faux will give you constipation of the brain and diarrhea of the mouth.
Salud
anyone remember who said," deficits don't matter"?
Clue...it was a repugnican
Yes Tomas, that's what every politician has done. No argument there.
But for Barry to propose $1.6 TRILLION in new taxes with no assurance of spending cuts - simply not reasonable. Look, there is NOT a revenue problem. (And why is 'revenue' always mean 'tax' to Dems?) There is a spending problem.
How about we all agree to stop kicking the can down the road. Let housing do what it may. Go with a flax tax. Eliminate ALL tax deductions. Implement a VAT: you buy, you pay. Of course the pols in Washington won't go for this: too simple and makes too much sense.
Look, our politicians - Reps included - have put us into a precarious position again. Not the first time, won't be the last. But every time the buffoons in Washington yell fire, Dems want to raise taxes. Makes no sense. Let's get off the carnival ride now: I hope Congress does nothing: sure little if anything will happen - but it sure is better than getting $1.6 trillion in OUR money stolen by the thieves in Washington.
It was The Big Dick cheney. The full quote: "Ronald Reagan proved deficits don't matter."
But, of course, the goosesteppers don't like to be reminded of the lies they've swallowed.
George, under our constitution congress writes the budget. Blame congress for no budget.
Grande, Not quite true. During Bush era deficit was a stable percent of GDP. If the economy didn't implode and spending didn't skyrocket we would have been ok. Barry's problem is the slow growing economy. We just aren't growing fast enough to growtax revenue. Add in millions of long term unemployed who will never recover their earning potential and baby boomers leaving the workforce en masse and the US has little chance to generate the revenue they need to sustain the current spending.
hey george, listen who got us in debt in the first place? it was not the democrat, it was your former president GW Bush. starting war with iraq,and destroying afganistan and all the money here went there you republicans did not do nothing then when Bush took office but trying to be a cowboy. so we not in debt for what happen before president obama it was Bush who put this country in debt man. and also raising taxes will be better because it going to get raise regardless now if romney would been president he will do what i said before bush did raise taxes on we middle class. so dude quit your sad song and realize that taxes will have to be rase for wealthy obama is trying to look out for us middle class if these stupid republicans work with him and pass the deal george man think boy.
Republicans said Obama cut $716 Billion from Medicare Advantage before the election. Now they say Obama never implemented any cuts to medicare. And for this reason, they cannot reach a Fiscal Cliff deal. Yea.......Right !!!!!! Republicans are brain dead........They can't even lie well........
Residents Alerted to Obamas' Hawaiian Holiday Plans
BY MALIA ZIMMERMAN - KAILUA, OAHU - Residents living near the beachfront homes where President Barack Obama and First Family vacation with their friends every year since 2008 were alerted on Monday to some specifics of the Obamas' holiday vacation plans.
The report delivered to residents living along the ocean and canal that surrounds the multi-million dollar homes at Kailuana Place where the President stays, informed them of restrictions that will be implemented for 20 days beginning December 17 and running through January 6.
In a matter of weeks, Kailua residents will see the familiar street barricades fronted by U.S. Secret Service agents and Navy Seals and the U.S. Coast Guard stationed in canal and ocean waters.
The President, who spent some of his childhood years in Hawaii, brings his wife, two daughters, Sasha and Malia, with dog Bo in tow, each holiday season. They settle into the small town community known for its spectacular sparkling beaches, warm turquoise ocean, rolling surf, country shops and restaurants and friendly people.
The homes where they stay are just a two-minute drive from Kaneohe Bay and the Marine Corps Base Hawaii, where the Obamas and friends can access private white sand beaches and military workout facilities.
Kailua Beach
While many residents welcome the First Family, others are disheartened by the restrictions put on air, water and road travel while the President and family are in town, especially because it is the holiday season and many families on vacation want to use their boats or surf and paddle in the welcoming ocean waves fronting the Kailua homes. In addition, the President's caravan of at least 22 vehicles including an ambulance can easily overwhelm the community that typically has single lane streets.
Adding to the controversy surrounding the President's visit is the cost of the trip.
With the staff, special forces, local police presence and equipment, the President's visit adds up annually to at least a $4 million vacation courtesy of the Hawaii and federal taxpayers.
While the President and his friends pay for their own rental homes, taxpayers pick up the cost of security and waterfront housing for the Secret Service, Navy Seals and Coast Guard as well as staff accommodations at a plush beachfront Waikiki hotel.
TRAVEL: $3,629,622
The biggest expense is President Barack Obama's round trip flight to Hawaii via Air Force One.
A Congressional Research Service report released in May 2012 said the plane typically used by the President, a Boeing 747, costs $179,750 per hour to operate. The U.S. Air Force has listed the cost of travel as high as $181,757 per flight hour.
Travel time for Air Force One direct from Washington D.C. to Hawaii is about 9 hours or as high as $1,635,813 each way for a total of $3,271,622 for the round trip to Hawaii and back.
The cost for USAF C-17 cargo aircraft that transports the Presidential limos, helicopters and other support equipment to Hawaii has never been disclosed in the years the President has traveled to Hawaii. However, the flight time between Andrews Air Force Base and Hawaii is at about 21.5 hours roundtrip, with estimated operating cost of $12,000 per hour. (Source: GAO report, updated by C-17 crew member). The United States Marine Corps provides a presidential helicopter, along with pilots and support crews for the test flights, which travel on another C-17 flight. That is $258,000, not including costs for the 4 to 6 member crew's per diem and hotel.
Moana Surfrider Resort
The rentals are fronted by the ocean and backed by a canal. So, the taxpayers must cover the costs for housing U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Coast Guard and Navy Seals in beach front and canal front homes around where the President stays.
Last year, that added up to about $200 per bedroom per day, or $21,600 per average home for a nearly three week period, with special forces renting at least 7 homes. Security arrives ahead of the President costing taxpayers about $176,400 for the length of the visit.
The President's staff and White House Press Corps typically stay at one of Hawaii's oldest and most elegant hotels, the Moana Surfrider. Besides its stunningly beautiful view of Waikiki, and its traditional Hawaiian architecture and decor, it is one of the most pricey hotels in the state and government rates are not available during the holiday season. Rooms start at around $270 but can cost as much as $370 a night for an ocean view before Christmas, and climb much higher around the new year.
A conservative estimate with rooms at $270 (excluding a 9.25 percent Transient Accommodation Tax and a 4.712 percent General Excise Tax on each bill, meals, internet charges and other charges) means the taxpayers are covering more than $129,600 in hotel bills for some two dozen staff.
LOCAL TAXPAYER COSTS: $260,000
Local police are paid over time for the President's visit, which has historically cost Oahu taxpayers $250,000.
The city ambulance the accompanies the President 24 hours a day through his entire visit is about $10,000 to city taxpayers.
UNKNOWN COSTS
There are several costs the White House annually refuses to release, citing security.
■For example, the President's security usually rents an entire floor of an office building in Kailua on the canal during the president's stay.
■There are security upgrades and additional phone lines to several private homes where Obama and friends are staying. That includes bullet proof glass installed, home security systems disabled, new security measures put into place and additional phone lines added.
■There is the cost for car rentals and fuel for White House staff staying at a Waikiki Hotel.
■And there are additional travel costs Secret Service and White House staff traveling ahead of the President.
The total cost (based on what is known) for a 20-day round trip vacation to Hawaii for the President and his family and staff and security is more than $4 million.
Hawaii Reporter annually has requested details on the cost of the President's trip, but the White House will not release any figures, citing security concerns. A spokesperson has maintained the costs are "in line" with other presidential vacations.
Hawaii Reporter has sought to determine the cost of vacations for the current president and last two presidents but the Government Accountability Office referred Hawaii Reporter back to the White House spokesperson.
\_/ | | | | | | | __|__ | ^ | | | \ \_/ / '._.'Horrible horrible Obama. No President ever took vacations before he did. Ever. All first ladies were chained to the White House columns before Michelle. Evil.
The goosesteppers also hate being reminded that The Little Dubya is to this day the Presidential Record Holder for most vacation time taken by a sitting president.
But, he's a wealthy white guy, so it's OK.
How can you people keep coming up with the same old lame stories ? He's a muslim, he's a marxist, he wasn't born in the USA and still this ignorance on " How dare the president take a vacation " Get real get back under the rock you crawled out from under. Think of some way you might become a productive member of society instaed of a total waste of oxygen.
I assume the federal highway system is up for becoming all toll roads? After all, Truckers pay a "road use" tax which I'm thinking is analogous to my medicare tax. Doesn't that make both systems "entitlements." I suppose if the republicans were REALLY serious, they should be demanding that the Federal highways be turned over tot he states to become tool roads with no federal dollars attached!
That's EXACTLY what our Gov. Perry proposed for state roads here in TX. He basically wanted to give rights to construction and collection of tolls to a Spanish company. Luckily, even our very Republican state legislature put a stop to it. But not before one road was built. Which one? The now famous loop 130 where the legal speed limit is 85 mph. While I'm not against a high speed limit the only reason is is set to that is because it was part of the contract.
There are somethings the government should do and infrastructure is most certainly one of them. We should not be selling our basic infrastructure systems to private entities, especially foreign companies.
Gov Ultrasound wants tolls here in Virginia on I-95, I-64 and I-81.
Here's a starting point. If the Republicans wouldn't vote down every jobs bill some of these people might get off of the entitlement programs, thus lowering entitlement costs and creating revenue from taxes. Rocket scientists, pffft!
As if the republicans are going to vote for union payoffs! Which is exactly what any of Obama's 'jobs' bills are.
Tammy, If you paid 30% tax base and I paid 15%, dont tell me or anyone on here you wouldnt be pissed! All we want is fairness, which is Not as it is now.
ahhh...I can already hear the excuses for Republican's losing seats in 2014....'It's OBAMA'S fault'....riiiight
The democrats did get more votes than the republicans in the house races. Democracy doesn't exist in those races.
Mcconell is saying Obama wants wealth destruction.
These Republicans have a lot of nerve, they are free loading off the 98%.
Why should 98% of Americans make the rich richer?
They will go over the cliff by holding the American people the 98% hostage.
There are more uber-wealthy democrats (especially in Congress) than there are uber-wealthy republicans.
So, the Obama administration proposes entitlement cuts in Obamacare and the Republicans turn around and successfully use them in 2010 to campaign against Democrats in 2010. Here's a suggestion, Republicans, if you're sooo hot and bothered about entitlements, YOU come up with some suggested reforms then us Democrats will decide whether we like them or not - in 2014.
How about the Post Office, the Republicans making them put 75 years of health care money in the pot.
Everything they touch they ruin. What would people do after the Republicans bankrupt the postal service?
Perhaps that is because the USPS got caught short-changing the pension and health funds for so long that they had to set an example.
As far as Medicare is concerned, there is only one solution in the long run - single payer system for everyone in the country NHS (National Health System). The private health care, insurance companies will all be history. The hospitals, healthcare professsionals, pharma companies and doctors will have to accept reasonable payments for their services and goods - all controlled by a board that will determine the reasonable payments. The current system will not be able to survive in the long run.
The 'liberal' press just keeps helping the republicans. Social security and medicare have their own trust funds. They are not 42% of the federal government spending. SS has never cost the governent a single penny. The media help the republicans perpetuate this lie.
If you want real facts on social security instead of the republican scare tactics go to:
So who is to blame? There's plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn't fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn't do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:
•The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.
•Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.
•Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.
•Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.
•The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.
•Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.
•Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.
•Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.
•The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
•An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.
•Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.
The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) the crisis is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult.
Hey Republicans, SS & Medicare are not on the table right now. Medicaid, Food Stamps, Welfare both corporate & personal can be so I suggest you work within these items for budget cuts. Why don't you come up with your own proposal to cut back these programs and not wait for everyone else to do it for you. Im a center right independent who would support some cutbacks in these areas along with the military. So get to work.
The most expensive entitlements our country supports are the tax cuts for the wealthy, corporate welfare, preferrential treatment for Big Oil and the $Billions wasted every year on weapons systems that we don't need. It is time to invest in people and in our country and stop giving money away to the spoiled, entitled wealthy who act as if they are owed every break they get.
NO. Tax cuts are NOT entitlements.
And cutting taxes from ridiculously high levels was the right thing to do. Tightening loopholes to make Apple and Google actually pay more than 5% in taxes is what is needed...not singling out Big Oil who pay billions and billions in taxes (and employ US workers). Apple outsources and pay almost no taxes...want to rant...rant against that!
and collect $billions in tax breaks. But we can't cut those, can we? Why? Because Republicans collect just way too much graft from oil companies!
You wanna cut? First thing we cut is oil subsidies!
T rex-oil companies get multi-billion dollar taxpayer paid subsidies every year while they are making multi-billion dollar profits each quarter.
If the Republicans are so insistent on free markets, let the oil companies invest their profits back into their companies and stop sucking on the tax payers teat.
I love watching the anger from the Lord and Saviors crew when the GOP finally uses those same Obama tactics. Let the PO
TUS Obama make the first decisions for entitlement cuts and take any heat that comes with it.Here's coming back at you Barack!
The Republicans have never made any committment to what cuts they want to make other than to say "entitlements" Let's cut entitlelmets - preferrential tax treatment for corporations and the wealthy, low capital gains taxes, carried interest and all the rest of the tax breaks that the rich and privaleged feel entitled to - and stop talking about Social Security and Medicare as if they are handouts. Those who recieve these benefits worked and invested for them and they shouldn't even be on the table.
Allow the sequestration cuts to happen - there's a serious 10% to start, and then we can talk about another bite of the military.
Now will you stop holding the middle class hostage again?
ss and medicare should not be on the table, Obama is the ones that took the money out for obamacare. that we the people worked for years to pay into.
You got that from the Liars Romney and Ryan didn't you? Or maybe from the Lying Liars that lie at fox. Obama took NO money out of MediCare. Those were savings to the system that were used for health care but also lengthed the life of Medicare.
Interesting point: the $760Billion that Ryan the Liar kept lying about was the exact same number that he had in his budget proposal!
good post!
Social Security and Medicare ARE an entitlement since current retirees are receiving FAR more than they paid in even if you factor in the 10 year treasury rate.
I would immediately END Social Security and Medicare refunding each and EVERY American who has paid in to this defunct system EVERY dollar PLUS the 10 year treasury rate for each dollar they paid in less the money already paid out to either medicare or SS on their behalf.
what makes you say something dumb like?,yes he should keep it on the table thats isnthe best plan ever.look bush didnt offer nothing like that and no way romney would match this plan that obama is offering you all should realize that.
GHX there is something called inflation. Get educated before you post.
Don't know about anyone else, but Medicare is not free nor an entitlement. I pay $100 a month, due to go up Jan. 1 to who knows what, for Part B, pay more for Part D. I have a Medicare Advantage Plan, but of course to keep it I have to pay my Part B $100, plus co-pay. That means my health care ain't free folks. If I paid Part B and Part D seperately, I'd have to pay 20% for the Doctor, higher (much higher) co-pay for drugs. That ain't free.
On the other hand, our Representatives and Senators plus the President and all Cabinet members, get health care that a person not there can only dream of. FREE. And they don't pay Medicare or Social Security. So why should they be exempt from paying what the rest of us pay. I'd like to have that health care plan folks.
And cutting off SS deductions at 110k is totally ridiculous, especially when they have to pay totally into Medicare. Where does that come from? It wouldn't hurt them in the least to pay their full part like the peons that don't make that much.
The Republicans aren't serious about taxes. The tax on 250k would only be on adjusted income, not total income. That means after all deductions, and believe me, there are plenty of deductions to take. Only one person in Congress was not a Millionaire, Joe Lieberman, and he got out of the rat race. Guess who all of them want to really take care of. It ain't us folks, unless we have a pretty damn good amount of individual worth.
Do what the Catholics do. Lock all of them in a room, a sparsely decorated room with minimal facilities, and don't unlock the room and let them out until an agreement is reached. I don't like the Catholic religion, or any organized religion for that matter, but do admire the way they pick their Pope. It works.
I live in nearly the Redist of all Red States and one Senator is getting away from Norquist. No new taxes? Ronald Reagan, the Republicani can hero, raised taxes 17 times during his eight years as President. And the Norquist pledge was siged when he was President.
Wake up you Republicans. Taxes have to go up. Social Security and Medicare just don't need to go down. Cut Defense spending by the abovesaid one-third. There's plenty of fat, including Generals who can't keep it zipped. There are certainly other areas where spending ca be cut, including two unfunded wars. Those are places where we don't have a dog in the fight and never have. We can just do like the Russians did, pick up all the pieces we can, leave what we can't and get out. Leave and not look back. We don't need a Military presence in every piece of crap country in the world. Cut the drug war. It's unwinnable. Sell the drugs from licensed Pharmacies, tax hell out of them. Not as many drugs will be sold but tax receipts will definitely go up. There have to be quite a few other taxes that can go up, including everyone paying their fair share of income taxes. In other words, do as Buffet says. Have a minimum tax on those who make over a certain amount. More taxes into the Federal coffers, although it would be wasted on useless programs, not those that would help the people out, like fixing our infrastructure,
Oh hell, just give them all guns and knives and let them have at it and the last person standing can do as he/she wants.
This is not true. Democrats are talking about limiting the amount of deductions any taxpayer can take. Eliminating or putting a cap on deductions does affect the Total Income!
Whining about wars is great...but it is done and nobody can go back in time.
Our government spent too much, get over it. Everyone had a tax cut, get over it. Asking one small slice of Americans to foot the bill for all of this...while asking to simultaneously borrow more is beyond the pail. And this is what Obama demands. It is wrong, it is not fair, and it is unsustainable. The 1% cannot possibly foot the whole bill themselves. Any economist or mathematician can see that.
Borrowing more not only kicks the can down the road, but it makes the problem even worse.
I agree! taxes have to go up on the wealthiest folk because for so long under the bush years they never paid nothing not even a dime,but we the middle class been paying a arm and a leg,and thats not fair to us who is working from pay check to pay check and trying to make ends meet. look me and my wife together make under 250,000 way under that and its hard for us to make that,but the wealthy people think it hard for them and some make millions and hey they can afford it.obama isnt trying to say the middle class will not pay nothing,yes we will but not as much as the wealthy and thats should be fair. the rich need to get off thier tail and pay and quit crying like john boehner who think rising taxes on the rich is not fair,but it is fair if we middle class paid high taxes in the pass during the bush years then the rich have to do it with no problem.