Enough B S! What is damaging in the speakers new bill?

[Modbert]

Yes, the DC is for what has already been spent. But spending needs to be macheted NOW so in six months (or whenever) we don't need to raise the DC again.

We can just raise the debt ceiling through 2012 and have Congress get something done before the election. If they don't, the voters can speak of their displeasure about that. There is no point in cutting spending if we're not going to raise the debt ceiling and just drive the economy off the cliff in the process.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not saying we shouldn't cut spending. I'm simply saying that if you want to cut spending in order to not lose our credit rating then you also need to raise the debt ceiling. Otherwise our credit rating is going to suffer anyway.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Yes, the DC is for what has already been spent. But spending needs to be macheted NOW so in six months (or whenever) we don't need to raise the DC again.

We can just raise the debt ceiling through 2012 and have Congress get something done before the election. If they don't, the voters can speak of their displeasure about that. There is no point in cutting spending if we're not going to raise the debt ceiling and just drive the economy off the cliff in the process.

???

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There are no real cuts in the bill. It's from the CBO baseline. It's imaginary.

The "Super Congress".

It only leaves us with the issue of the debt ceiling having to be raised again possibly by around Christmas. What some people don't seem to understand is that the Debt Ceiling is related to obligations already incurred.

Correct.

There’s also the idiocy of the ‘balanced budget’ amendment, an unnecessary political contrivance.

We can just raise the debt ceiling through 2012 and have Congress get something done before the election. If they don't, the voters can speak of their displeasure about that. There is no point in cutting spending if we're not going to raise the debt ceiling and just drive the economy off the cliff in the process.

Correct again – the ‘debt ceiling’ is a non issue, just raise it – or better yet repeal it – and move on to more meaningful, substantive deficit reduction measures.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Yes, the DC is for what has already been spent. But spending needs to be macheted NOW so in six months (or whenever) we don't need to raise the DC again.

We can just raise the debt ceiling through 2012 and have Congress get something done before the election. If they don't, the voters can speak of their displeasure about that. There is no point in cutting spending if we're not going to raise the debt ceiling and just drive the economy off the cliff in the process.

I read your previous posts and looked at your link. I failed to see the part where the cbo or gao claimed that the cuts were phantoms.

WHAAAAAAA??????? to the statement you just made!!!!

You cut spending because your broke. Doh....

 

[Modbert]

???

Not raising the debt ceiling before August 2 while Congress bickers for a couple more weeks/months on a deficit cutting plan will result in economic disaster most likely. Making the whole idea of cutting the debt to avoid our credit rating crashing and burning moot because it will have done so by then.

What Congress needs to do is raise the debt ceiling and then work on a bill to cut the deficit and debt.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Yes, the DC is for what has already been spent. But spending needs to be macheted NOW so in six months (or whenever) we don't need to raise the DC again.

We can just raise the debt ceiling through 2012 and have Congress get something done before the election. If they don't, the voters can speak of their displeasure about that. There is no point in cutting spending if we're not going to raise the debt ceiling and just drive the economy off the cliff in the process.

ORRRRRR we can just start being responsible??????? christ

 

[Modbert]

I read your previous posts and looked at your link. I failed to see the part where the cbo or gao claimed that the cuts were phantoms.

WHAAAAAAA??????? to the statement you just made!!!!

You cut spending because your broke. Doh....

You don't seem to understand the concept of Boehner's bill.

Boehner Plan Doesn’t Cut Spending | Cato @ Liberty

The “cuts” in the Boehner plan are only cuts from the CBO baseline, which is an imaginary path of future spending designed as a planning tool for Congress. Boehner can propose to spend any amount in any future year he wants, and in this plan he choose to have a steadily rising spending path.

The Boehner plan also doesn’t cut spending in a more fundamental way. It doesn’t lay out any particular programs or agencies to terminate. I’m in favor of spending caps as a secondary enforcement mechanism, but actual cuts have to come first. A caps-only plan like Boehner’s just kicks the can down the road. At best, it simply nudges future legislators to actually cut something specific.

Furthermore, read what I said to Zoom and the edit I made to clarify my comments. Don't take my comments out of context.

 

[Modbert]

ORRRRRR we can just start being responsible??????? christ

We have to be responsible by both raising the debt ceiling and cutting spending. If you don't raise the debt ceiling then there will be consequences. You're ignoring that.

You also still haven't replied to my post from earlier.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

???

Not raising the debt ceiling before August 2 while Congress bickers for a couple more weeks/months on a deficit cutting plan will result in economic disaster most likely. Making the whole idea of cutting the debt to avoid our credit rating crashing and burning moot because it will have done so by then.

What Congress needs to do is raise the debt ceiling and then work on a bill to cut the deficit and debt.

DUMB LOGIC

Democrats are kicking and screaming now about these little cuts and you want us to trust them to do the right thing after getting more money?

 

[Full-Auto]

I read your previous posts and looked at your link. I failed to see the part where the cbo or gao claimed that the cuts were phantoms.

WHAAAAAAA??????? to the statement you just made!!!!

You cut spending because your broke. Doh....

You don't seem to understand the concept of Boehner's bill.

Boehner Plan Doesn’t Cut Spending | Cato @ Liberty

The “cuts” in the Boehner plan are only cuts from the CBO baseline, which is an imaginary path of future spending designed as a planning tool for Congress. Boehner can propose to spend any amount in any future year he wants, and in this plan he choose to have a steadily rising spending path.

The Boehner plan also doesn’t cut spending in a more fundamental way. It doesn’t lay out any particular programs or agencies to terminate. I’m in favor of spending caps as a secondary enforcement mechanism, but actual cuts have to come first. A caps-only plan like Boehner’s just kicks the can down the road. At best, it simply nudges future legislators to actually cut something specific.

Furthermore, read what I said to Zoom and the edit I made to clarify my comments. Don't take my comments out of context.

Your a bit behind The new one passed and was shelved without looking at the contents.

 

[Modbert]

DUMB LOGIC

Democrats are kicking and screaming now about these little cuts and you want us to trust them to do the right thing after getting more money?

Last I checked, President Obama and Harry Reid had entitlement cuts on the table. I've yet to see one thing that the Republicans have put on the table and are willing to compromise.

If Congress doesn't want to cut spending, then the voters will show their displeasure come next November. Pretty simple.

 

[WillowTree]

Boehner's plan calls for a one dollar cut for every one dollar raised in the debt ceiling and what it calls for that really chaps the dimocratretards asses is "a balanced budget amendment".

 

[Full-Auto]

DUMB LOGIC

Democrats are kicking and screaming now about these little cuts and you want us to trust them to do the right thing after getting more money?

Last I checked, President Obama and Harry Reid had entitlement cuts on the table. I've yet to see one thing that the Republicans have put on the table and are willing to compromise.

If Congress doesn't want to cut spending, then the voters will show their displeasure come next November. Pretty simple.

Partially correct but you left out the tax increase that was to accompany them.

 

[Modbert]

Partially correct but you left out the tax increase that was to accompany them.

That's right. Republicans actually have to compromise if they want entitlement cuts. Imagine that? Actually acting like a mature adult?

 

[Modbert]

Your a bit behind The new one passed and was shelved without looking at the contents.

It hasn't changed. Far as I know, the new bill doesn't name any specific programs or cuts.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

ORRRRRR we can just start being responsible??????? christ

We have to be responsible by both raising the debt ceiling and cutting spending. If you don't raise the debt ceiling then there will be consequences. You're ignoring that.

You also still haven't replied to my post from earlier.

Im not ignoring raising the ceiling, Im not arguing that point. And yes i replied to your post you just missed it. Democrats have shown that they cant spend responsibly for the past 3 years. No budgets to guide spending, just one boondoggle after another. So why the hell should we trust them to do the right thing now? If we dont like it we can vote them out you say? Yea right, by then the damage could be irreversible.

 

[Zoom-boing]

???

Not raising the debt ceiling before August 2 while Congress bickers for a couple more weeks/months on a deficit cutting plan will result in economic disaster most likely. Making the whole idea of cutting the debt to avoid our credit rating crashing and burning moot because it will have done so by then.

What Congress needs to do is raise the debt ceiling and then work on a bill to cut the deficit and debt.

Ok, thought you were talking about 'down the road' (in relation to my earlier post) rather than now.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Your a bit behind The new one passed and was shelved without looking at the contents.

It hasn't changed. Far as I know, the new bill doesn't name any specific programs or cuts.

well there is a source we cant refute! Because you dont think any cuts are in it, it must be so.

 

[Modbert]

Im not ignoring raising the ceiling, Im not arguing that point. And yes i replied to your post you just missed it. Democrats have shown that they cant spend responsibly for the past 3 years. No budgets to guide spending, just one boondoggle after another. So why the hell should we trust them to do the right thing now? If we dont like it we can vote them out you say? Yea right, by then the damage could be irreversible.

Neither party has shown they can spend responsibly over the last three decades now at the very least. We've raised, extended, or altered the definition of the debt ceiling 91 times since June 1940. 36 times under Democratic Presidents.

However, if it's one thing we can trust both parties on, it's trying to save their own asses from being voted out. If the American people call for cuts, they have no choice but to comply.

 

[Modbert]

well there is a source we cant refute! Because you dont think any cuts are in it, it must be so.

Well I could be wrong. If I am, I'm more than happy to say so if someone can prove I'm wrong.

I have no problem with that whatsoever.