Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Except the President has already put a offer on the table and has even made discussions about cutting both Social Security and Medicare. Also as The Economist points out, the deal being offered right now is pretty much what the GOP wanted.
Furthermore, you seem to think that having only 70% of their income coming in would be a good thing even for the short term. Any reason you decided to ignore warnings from say S&P that will drop our credit rating to a D if we don't raise the debt ceiling?
The only bills the U.S. government is legally obligated to pay are U.S. Treasury bills.
You let me know how not paying our creditors will go. Just as well as you paying only 70% of your credit card bill each month would go.
Pelosi has already said that the best appraoch to the election is to allow the deal to lapse, cut the payments to SS Recipients and blame the Reps. Reid refuses to allow any debate on a budget on the Floor of the Senate.
The Big 0 is saying that increasing the tax on corporate jets will solve the problem. 700 years of this deduction applied to the deficit would pay for one month of the Big 0's budgetary failures.
What can you produce to indicate that this is anything but a ruse and a swindle?
It's an idle threat. The change in credit rating will occur only if the government defaults on Treasury bills.
Assuming you voted, does this mean you've been won over to the Big 0's camp by his enlightened leadership?
I don't agree with the President on many issues, so insert another quarter and try again. Also, why are you calling the President a robot?
Does that mean you voted for McCain or that you did not vote?
There's a robot called the Big Zero?
Does that mean you voted for McCain or that you did not vote?
There's a robot called the Big Zero?
I didn't vote. Also, I figured you were trying to put The Big O. The Big O is a robot.
Is the name-calling really necessary anyway?
Conceeding the point that default would be a bad thing, how often do you propose we raise the debt ceiling and to what level must it rise before it becomes a problem and spending should be reduced?
Is there any circimstance under which you feel that it might be good to reduce the spending and to stop increasing the debt?
Or we can just raise the debt ceiling and continue the spending cuts talks that are currently going on.
We raised the Debt ceiling seven times during the Bush Administration, don't suddenly act like you all care now.
W spent money like a sailor on a three day leave. The Big 0 spends money like a pimp with three days to live.
The Big 0 has equalled the debt increase under Bush in only two years. Impressive.
W was wrong to have done it and the Big 0 is wrong to have done it so much more dramatically.
W was a Liberal in his spending practices. IMHO, he was wrong to have spent more than was collected. That W was wrong does little to prove the the Big 0 is right.
So, I'll ask again: Is there any circimstance under which you feel that it might be good to reduce the spending and to stop increasing the debt?
Didn't vote? Why are you entering into debate on this if you don't vote? In the house in which i was raised, If you didn't vote, you had no voice in the debate.
You notice how he didn't even attempt to answer your question?
Pelosi has already said that the best appraoch to the election is to allow the deal to lapse, cut the payments to SS Recipients and blame the Reps. Reid refuses to allow any debate on a budget on the Floor of the Senate.
The Big 0 is saying that increasing the tax on corporate jets will solve the problem. 700 years of this deduction applied to the deficit would pay for one month of the Big 0's budgetary failures.
What can you produce to indicate that this is anything but a ruse and a swindle?
Mind giving a link to anything you just said?
You notice how he didn't even attempt to answer your question?
Except where I did.
Pelosi has already said that the best appraoch to the election is to allow the deal to lapse, cut the payments to SS Recipients and blame the Reps. Reid refuses to allow any debate on a budget on the Floor of the Senate.
The Big 0 is saying that increasing the tax on corporate jets will solve the problem. 700 years of this deduction applied to the deficit would pay for one month of the Big 0's budgetary failures.
What can you produce to indicate that this is anything but a ruse and a swindle?
Mind giving a link to anything you just said?
HotAirPundit: Krauthammer on the Jet Tax: If It Was Collected Every Year Since John the Baptist, You Wouldn't Cut One of Obama's Deficit's By Half
KRAUTHAMMER: "I did the math on this. If you collect the corporate jet tax every year for the next 5000 years, you will cover one year of the debt Obama has run up"
EDITORIAL: Reid's budget strategy - Washington Times
For the second year in a row, Mr. Reid has failed to produce a Senate budget. That means any member may bring a plan to the floor andget it passed with 51 votes. As many as four different budgets could be considered this week: Mr. Ryans; conservative plans from Sen. Patrick J. Toomey, Pennsylvania Republican, and Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican; and President Obamas 2012 budget. The Democratic majority is expected to vote down all of them, including the White House proposal.
Nancy Pelosi Says House Dems Wont Support Obama on Proposed Debt-Limit Entitlement Cuts | Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze
The article notes that the GOP feels that way and says they're wrong for believing that.
HotAirPundit: Krauthammer on the Jet Tax: If It Was Collected Every Year Since John the Baptist, You Wouldn't Cut One of Obama's Deficit's By Half
KRAUTHAMMER: "I did the math on this. If you collect the corporate jet tax every year for the next 5000 years, you will cover one year of the debt Obama has run up"
EDITORIAL: Reid's budget strategy - Washington Times
For the second year in a row, Mr. Reid has failed to produce a Senate budget. That means any member may bring a plan to the floor andget it passed with 51 votes. As many as four different budgets could be considered this week: Mr. Ryans; conservative plans from Sen. Patrick J. Toomey, Pennsylvania Republican, and Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican; and President Obamas 2012 budget. The Democratic majority is expected to vote down all of them, including the White House proposal.
Nancy Pelosi Says House Dems Wont Support Obama on Proposed Debt-Limit Entitlement Cuts | Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze
And under what circumstances exactly is the reduction of spending desirable?
America's debt: Shame on them | The Economist
IN THREE weeks, if there is no political deal, the American government will go into default. Not, one must pray, on its sovereign debt. But the country will have to stop paying someone: perhaps pensioners, or government suppliers, or soldiers. That would be damaging enough at a time of economic fragility. And the longer such a default went on, the greater the risk of provoking a genuine bond crisis would become.
There is no good economic reason why this should be happening. America’s net indebtedness is a perfectly affordable 65% of GDP, and throughout the past three years of recession and tepid recovery investors have been more than happy to go on lending to the federal government. The current problems, rather, are political. Under America’s elaborate separation of powers, Congress must authorise any extension of the debt ceiling, which now stands at $14.3 trillion. Back in May the government bumped up against that limit, but various accounting dodges have been used to keep funds flowing. It is now reckoned that these wheezes will be exhausted by August 2nd.
Now, however, the Republicans are pushing things too far. Talks with the administration ground to a halt last month, despite an offer from the Democrats to cut at least $2 trillion and possibly much more out of the budget over the next ten years. Assuming that the recovery continues, that would be enough to get the deficit back to a prudent level. As The Economist went to press, Mr Obama seemed set to restart the talks.
The sticking-point is not on the spending side. It is because the vast majority of Republicans, driven on by the wilder-eyed members of their party and the cacophony of conservative media, are clinging to the position that not a single cent of deficit reduction must come from a higher tax take. This is economically illiterate and disgracefully cynical.
And the closer you look, the more unprincipled the Republicans look. Earlier this year House Republicans produced a report noting that an 85%-15% split between spending cuts and tax rises was the average for successful fiscal consolidations, according to historical evidence. The White House is offering an 83%-17% split (hardly a huge distance) and a promise that none of the revenue increase will come from higher marginal rates, only from eliminating loopholes. If the Republicans were real tax reformers, they would seize this offer.
Both parties have in recent months been guilty of fiscal recklessness. Right now, though, the blame falls clearly on the Republicans. Independent voters should take note.
The article sums up the current situation quite well.
Pelosi has already said that the best appraoch to the election is to allow the deal to lapse, cut the payments to SS Recipients and blame the Reps. Reid refuses to allow any debate on a budget on the Floor of the Senate.
The Big 0 is saying that increasing the tax on corporate jets will solve the problem. 700 years of this deduction applied to the deficit would pay for one month of the Big 0's budgetary failures.
What can you produce to indicate that this is anything but a ruse and a swindle?
Mind giving a link to anything you just said?
HotAirPundit: Krauthammer on the Jet Tax: If It Was Collected Every Year Since John the Baptist, You Wouldn't Cut One of Obama's Deficit's By Half
KRAUTHAMMER: "I did the math on this. If you collect the corporate jet tax every year for the next 5000 years, you will cover one year of the debt Obama has run up"
EDITORIAL: Reid's budget strategy - Washington Times
For the second year in a row, Mr. Reid has failed to produce a Senate budget. That means any member may bring a plan to the floor andget it passed with 51 votes. As many as four different budgets could be considered this week: Mr. Ryans; conservative plans from Sen. Patrick J. Toomey, Pennsylvania Republican, and Sen. Rand Paul, Kentucky Republican; and President Obamas 2012 budget. The Democratic majority is expected to vote down all of them, including the White House proposal.
Nancy Pelosi Says House Dems Wont Support Obama on Proposed Debt-Limit Entitlement Cuts | Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze
