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.
time for a recap...how did we get here, July 12th?
October 1st 2010- democrats do not approve a budget for 2011.
Nov. 2010- democrats lose house.
Noc. 2010- Obama cuts deal for an extension of the bush tax cuts, 2% payroll reduction for 2 years.
Jan. 2011 state of union. Wapo, NY Times remark that Obama has not addressed the deficit and has kick the can down the road proposing a 3.7 Trillion budget.
Feb thru April 2011- debates between dems and reps. – crafting a budget for the rest of the 2011 year, because there was no budget ( see above) and the gov. was being funded by ongoing resolutions, final agreement – 38.5 billion ( on an approx. 3.3 trillion budget) Harry Reid declared the deal "historic."
-June debt ceiling discussions start. Deadline – August 2. (adjusted). Obama calls for what would be an effective repeal of bush tax cuts as part of the debt. ceiling deal.
** Points;
- There is no budget submitted by the WH for 2012 as required ( budget due for approval by Oct. 1 2011).
- There is no Medicare fund adjustment submittal due by law from the WH.
- Reps apparently want a restructure of Medicare funding and budget cuts, are seen as holding the nation hostage because they will not agree to tax increases in the debt ceiling deal, even though obamacare has baked in numerous increases on those very “wealthy” whom the dems want to increase taxs on, again.
- Year 2011 budget cuts on paper and signed off- 38.5 billion.
The bill had garnered bipartisan support as well as the backing of President Obama.
But it drew criticism from some influential conservative and liberal groups, as well as a number of top lawmakers such as Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
Conservatives didn't like it because they were sure the commission would lean too heavily on tax increases to help close the looming fiscal shortfalls. Liberals were equally convinced the commission would lean too heavily on draconian spending cuts, particularly in Medicare and Social Security.
Some lawmakers didn't like it because they saw the commission as usurping their authority and the obligations of Congress.
Obama offered 4 trillion in cuts, which is more than the GOP is offering up and he alienated his own party by offering up entitlement cuts. Maybe it was a bluff but still the GOP won't budge to call his bluff.
I can see Obama as a one-termer but I also see the GOP losing their majority in the House too. People are not going to put up with this gamesmanship come November, 2012. If the debt ceiling isn't raised and the business world experiences what they predict they will experience, the GOP could lose their biggest allies.
All of this just because of narrow-minded partisanship by both parties and party over country. Egads,, what a bunch of losers!
He did not offer $4 trillion in cuts, he threw out the number $4 trillion to make it look like he was serious.
You fell for it, as usual.
Odd, then, that the Republicans didn't make that point. Exactly what apportionments would be cut are, of course, up to the myriad agencies to slice and dice. But the $4T in spending cuts include:
Massive cuts in domestic discretionary spending, from the baseline set by agreement with congressional Republicans that slashes $38.5 billion from spending for the current fiscal year. The total in spending cuts over 12 years would come to $770 billion in areas like education, the environment, transportation and other infrastructure, and in wages and benefits for federal government workers.
An additional $360 billion over 12 years in cuts in mandatory domestic programs, so called because they provide benefit payments that are mandated under federal law, including farm subsidies, federal pension insurance, food stamps, home heating assistance and income-support programs for the poor and disabled. Remember all the hoopla over those from the liberal base?
A further $480 billion in cuts over 12 years in federal health care spending, on top of the $1 trillion in cost-cutting already imposed to pay for the health care overhaul passed last year by a Democratic Congress. Obama outlined a series of policy changes in health care that he said would cut an additional $1 trillion in the decade after 2023. Who was paying attention to that concession?
In the event that spending cuts fail to reduce the federal deficit to the desired proportion of the US gross domestic product by 2014, Obama would establish a debt failsafe mechanism that would trigger across-the-board spending cuts and tax increases, likely to include a national sales tax or European-style Value Added Tax.
Cuts of $400 billion in military spending over 12 years, less than 4% of the gargantuan sum that the Pentagon, Department of Energy, Department of Homeland Security, CIA and other agencies will spend during that period on the armed forces, nuclear weapons and intelligence and security operations.
So there.
less than 4% of the gargantuan sum
time for a recap...how did we get here, July 12th?
October 1st 2010- democrats do not approve a budget for 2011.
Nov. 2010- democrats lose house.
Noc. 2010- Obama cuts deal for an extension of the bush tax cuts, 2% payroll reduction for 2 years.
Jan. 2011 state of union. Wapo, NY Times remark that Obama has not addressed the deficit and has kick the can down the road proposing a 3.7 Trillion budget.
Feb thru April 2011- debates between dems and reps. crafting a budget for the rest of the 2011 year, because there was no budget ( see above) and the gov. was being funded by ongoing resolutions, final agreement 38.5 billion ( on an approx. 3.3 trillion budget) Harry Reid declared the deal "historic."
-June debt ceiling discussions start. Deadline August 2. (adjusted). Obama calls for what would be an effective repeal of bush tax cuts as part of the debt. ceiling deal.
** Points;
- There is no budget submitted by the WH for 2012 as required ( budget due for approval by Oct. 1 2011).
- There is no Medicare fund adjustment submittal due by law from the WH.
- Reps apparently want a restructure of Medicare funding and budget cuts, are seen as holding the nation hostage because they will not agree to tax increases in the debt ceiling deal, even though obamacare has baked in numerous increases on those very wealthy whom the dems want to increase taxs on, again.
- Year 2011 budget cuts on paper and signed off- 38.5 billion.
You left out something else. Congress's refusal to accept the debt commission's recommendations, although it was the BEST blueprint to get things moving.
Senate votes down debt commission - Jan. 26, 2010
The bill had garnered bipartisan support as well as the backing of President Obama.
But it drew criticism from some influential conservative and liberal groups, as well as a number of top lawmakers such as Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
Conservatives didn't like it because they were sure the commission would lean too heavily on tax increases to help close the looming fiscal shortfalls. Liberals were equally convinced the commission would lean too heavily on draconian spending cuts, particularly in Medicare and Social Security.
Some lawmakers didn't like it because they saw the commission as usurping their authority and the obligations of Congress.
They'd much rather bicker over ideology than reality, and here we are. Still.
Maybe what the Republicans in Congress should do is run away to Canada. That would work. Then the dims could do it without them. They'd be heroes then right?
Considering the GOP is willing to throw away their best opportunity to cut the deficit because they rather play politics, I figured even you might least the bit angry Willow. But then I remembered, nah, it's Willow!
no one is going to get 'stiffed', the checks are backed by the full faith and credit of the United states of America. I cannot believe Drunkenmiller has more faith in that you do Toro, shame on you......
when aug 2 rolls by if there is no deal the checks will go out, the banks will cash them, IF it gets to that point someone is gonna cave by the 8th.
Most hedge fund managers are on the other side of Drunkenmiller, at least the ones I talk to. Drunkenmiller makes the assumption that if we default, we will hammer out a deal that will cut spending dramatically. Maybe. But what if he's wrong? What if there is no deal? What if it drags on for weeks? I will tell you this - absolutely everyone I talk to does not believe we will default. No one. That's where the market is at right now.
My own guess - and its just a guess - is that nothing happens when we pass the debt ceiling for the first few days as the market believes that the two sides come to a deal. If they do, great. Crisis avoided. But at some point after - maybe five days, maybe 10 days, I don't know - the market suddenly falls off a cliff. Listening to the rhetoric, I am beginning to think people will only deal if they are scared of the consequences. I don't think people are scared of the consequences. Just listen to all the denial here, especially on the right, that this is all just scare-mongering.
Let me ask you a question T, as Drunkenmiller sees it, I see it to wit; where does this end, thats where he is coming from, he obviously thinks that a Deal includes the cuts and re-working the liabilities etc. its the end game not just the debt ceiling and inho, he is exactly right.
This is not really about TODAY or Aug. 3rd, its about a great deal more than that there is a moral hazard here, this isn't the 90's or at any point here to fore, we are at a tipping point, if we just roll along now, no point in the future will they or anyone be able to make a case for same .. the rap will always be hey you cannot even think of letting grandpa go without his check ...
If the debt ceiling is funded minus a deal for re-structure and cuts, what happens in oh, say 2016 when Medicare especially, forget the what 25-28% gdp spending for a minute, is backing us into a corner that we will not be able to pull back from? What will the bond markets say then? What will grandpa say then?
I posted a simple timeline last page, this could have been hammered out months earlier, we are up against this deadline cheek to cheek because they PLANNED along to put the reps in this position, you know it, I know it, and for what?
Because they will NOT stop spending, what? 38.5 billion on a budget of 3.3 trillion? Seriously? And the reps are the bad guys here?
If they cave, what happens when we blow though this 2 T? what 18 months 2 years lets say obama is reelected and even if there is a rep senate too so what? We will be RIGHT BACK HERE BUT with all of the costs of those cuts and restructuring that should have taken place now, by the wayside and part of the debt..There will not be a case to be made, the reps will have caved once and they will be expected and blamed if they dont cave again and they will have even less 'authority'.. .
If the reps cave obama owns them, period, full stop.
And we will just slide on down and when obama leaves office and the fit hits the shan, it will be not Obamas fault, nope, but bush and/or whomever the poor slob that gets stuck as pres in 16 is ..and were will we be?
Most hedge fund managers are on the other side of Drunkenmiller, at least the ones I talk to. Drunkenmiller makes the assumption that if we default, we will hammer out a deal that will cut spending dramatically. Maybe. But what if he's wrong? What if there is no deal? What if it drags on for weeks? I will tell you this - absolutely everyone I talk to does not believe we will default. No one. That's where the market is at right now.
My own guess - and its just a guess - is that nothing happens when we pass the debt ceiling for the first few days as the market believes that the two sides come to a deal. If they do, great. Crisis avoided. But at some point after - maybe five days, maybe 10 days, I don't know - the market suddenly falls off a cliff. Listening to the rhetoric, I am beginning to think people will only deal if they are scared of the consequences. I don't think people are scared of the consequences. Just listen to all the denial here, especially on the right, that this is all just scare-mongering.
Let me ask you a question T, as Drunkenmiller sees it, I see it to wit; where does this end, that’s where he is coming from, he obviously thinks that a Deal includes the cuts and re-working the liabilities etc. its the end game not just the debt ceiling…and inho, he is exactly right.
This is not really about TODAY or Aug. 3rd, its about a great deal more than that……there is a moral hazard here, this isn't the 90's or at any point here to fore, we are at a tipping point, if we just roll along now, no point in the future will they or anyone be able to make a case for same….. the rap will always be hey you cannot even think of letting grandpa go without his check…...
If the debt ceiling is funded minus a deal for re-structure and cuts, what happens in oh, say 2016 when Medicare especially, forget the what 25-28% gdp spending for a minute, is backing us into a corner that we will not be able to pull back from? What will the “bond markets” say then? What will grandpa say then?
I posted a simple timeline last page, this could have been hammered out months earlier, we are up against this deadline cheek to cheek because they PLANNED along to put the reps in this position, you know it, I know it, and for what?
Because they will NOT stop spending, what? 38.5 billion on a budget of 3.3 trillion? Seriously? And the reps are the bad guys here?
If they cave, what happens when we blow though this 2 T? what 18 months 2 years…lets say obama is reelected and even if there is a rep senate too…so what? We will be RIGHT BACK HERE BUT with all of the costs of those cuts and restructuring that should have taken place now, by the wayside and part of the debt..There will not be a case to be made, the reps will have caved once and they will be expected and blamed if they don’t cave again and they will have even less 'authority'..….
If the reps cave obama owns them, period, full stop.
And we will just slide on down and when obama leaves office and the fit hits the shan, it will be not Obamas fault, nope, but bush and/or whomever the poor slob that gets stuck as pres in 16 is…..and were will we be?
Frankly, I think the major stumbling block for serious negotiations began with Paul Ryan's proposal, which was so radical on its face, that the Democrats just said no. For a change.
......when did they say yes...to what exactly? what prompts you to write 'for a change' as if the Democratic party has been some bi partisan drawbridge going down for the Republicans?
no one is going to get 'stiffed', the checks are backed by the full faith and credit of the United states of America. I cannot believe Drunkenmiller has more faith in that you do Toro, shame on you......
when aug 2 rolls by if there is no deal the checks will go out, the banks will cash them, IF it gets to that point someone is gonna cave by the 8th.
Most hedge fund managers are on the other side of Drunkenmiller, at least the ones I talk to. Drunkenmiller makes the assumption that if we default, we will hammer out a deal that will cut spending dramatically. Maybe. But what if he's wrong? What if there is no deal? What if it drags on for weeks? I will tell you this - absolutely everyone I talk to does not believe we will default. No one. That's where the market is at right now.
My own guess - and its just a guess - is that nothing happens when we pass the debt ceiling for the first few days as the market believes that the two sides come to a deal. If they do, great. Crisis avoided. But at some point after - maybe five days, maybe 10 days, I don't know - the market suddenly falls off a cliff. Listening to the rhetoric, I am beginning to think people will only deal if they are scared of the consequences. I don't think people are scared of the consequences. Just listen to all the denial here, especially on the right, that this is all just scare-mongering.
Let me ask you a question T, as Drunkenmiller sees it, I see it to wit; where does this end, thats where he is coming from, he obviously thinks that a Deal includes the cuts and re-working the liabilities etc. its the end game not just the debt ceiling and inho, he is exactly right.
This is not really about TODAY or Aug. 3rd, its about a great deal more than that there is a moral hazard here, this isn't the 90's or at any point here to fore, we are at a tipping point, if we just roll along now, no point in the future will they or anyone be able to make a case for same .. the rap will always be hey you cannot even think of letting grandpa go without his check ...
If the debt ceiling is funded minus a deal for re-structure and cuts, what happens in oh, say 2016 when Medicare especially, forget the what 25-28% gdp spending for a minute, is backing us into a corner that we will not be able to pull back from? What will the bond markets say then? What will grandpa say then?
I posted a simple timeline last page, this could have been hammered out months earlier, we are up against this deadline cheek to cheek because they PLANNED along to put the reps in this position, you know it, I know it, and for what?
Because they will NOT stop spending, what? 38.5 billion on a budget of 3.3 trillion? Seriously? And the reps are the bad guys here?
If they cave, what happens when we blow though this 2 T? what 18 months 2 years lets say obama is reelected and even if there is a rep senate too so what? We will be RIGHT BACK HERE BUT with all of the costs of those cuts and restructuring that should have taken place now, by the wayside and part of the debt..There will not be a case to be made, the reps will have caved once and they will be expected and blamed if they dont cave again and they will have even less 'authority'.. .
If the reps cave obama owns them, period, full stop.
And we will just slide on down and when obama leaves office and the fit hits the shan, it will be not Obamas fault, nope, but bush and/or whomever the poor slob that gets stuck as pres in 16 is ..and were will we be?
McConnell Offers 3-Stage
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell proposed a “last choice option” to avoid a default on U.S. debt obligations that effectively would grant President Barack Obama power to unilaterally raise the debt limit in installments.
McConnell’s plan would let the president raise the limit in three stages unless Congress disapproves by a two-thirds majority, while Obama would also be required to propose offsetting spending cuts. The spending reductions would be advisory, and the debt-ceiling increase would occur regardless of whether lawmakers enact the cuts, McConnell said.
Don Stewart, a spokesman for McConnell, said the plan would allow Obama to raise the debt limit while putting the onus on him and congressional Democrats to cut spending.
At the same time, Republicans wouldn’t have to agree to tax increases. The proposal would force Democrats to cast multiple votes to raise the debt ceiling before the next election, while giving Republicans the chance to vote against it without risking a default.
I would hope everyone can see through McConnell's plan and see his true intentions are just to play politics in order to make sure his plan of Obama being a one term President comes true. Despicable and irresponsible.
When his NUMBER ONE concern should be the well-being of every American in this country. It's just more of the B-S--that comes out of politicians mouths. And every single one of them play this game. And it's US that gets to pay for this BS.
I said NEW
As in fresh blood?
Except the new Republicans have already become part of the establishment.
Or did you miss their vote on the Patriot Act? Or their really dumb idea from not even a week ago?
if you say that then I take it as true and I retract my comment.
It just seemed to me that you were sure of the intentions of McConnell.....but I stand corrected.
Even Conservative bloggers agree that all McConnell is doing is kicking the political football down the field in order to avoid any sort of political pressure.
if you say that then I take it as true and I retract my comment.
It just seemed to me that you were sure of the intentions of McConnell.....but I stand corrected.
Even Conservative bloggers agree that all McConnell is doing is kicking the political football down the field in order to avoid any sort of political pressure.
Thus why it was ingenious.
Heck...Pelosi did it with the budget during the lame duck session...ingeniuos.
Doncha love it when our elected officials play games with our livlihoods?
yes, thats what I mean.
so, you're not sure...?or?
Well I'm not a fly on the wall so I don't know what exactly the Democrats thought. If I had to guess, I'm sure they knew they were going to have to raise the debt ceiling back in 2010.
When do we start paying down our debt instead of adding to it?
Obama offered 4 trillion in cuts, which is more than the GOP is offering up and he alienated his own party by offering up entitlement cuts. Maybe it was a bluff but still the GOP won't budge to call his bluff.
I can see Obama as a one-termer but I also see the GOP losing their majority in the House too. People are not going to put up with this gamesmanship come November, 2012. If the debt ceiling isn't raised and the business world experiences what they predict they will experience, the GOP could lose their biggest allies.
All of this just because of narrow-minded partisanship by both parties and party over country. Egads,, what a bunch of losers!
He did not offer $4 trillion in cuts, he threw out the number $4 trillion to make it look like he was serious.
You fell for it, as usual.
Odd, then, that the Republicans didn't make that point. Exactly what apportionments would be cut are, of course, up to the myriad agencies to slice and dice. But the $4T in spending cuts include:
Massive cuts in domestic discretionary spending, from the baseline set by agreement with congressional Republicans that slashes $38.5 billion from spending for the current fiscal year. The total in spending cuts over 12 years would come to $770 billion in areas like education, the environment, transportation and other infrastructure, and in wages and benefits for federal government workers.
An additional $360 billion over 12 years in cuts in mandatory domestic programs, so called because they provide benefit payments that are mandated under federal law, including farm subsidies, federal pension insurance, food stamps, home heating assistance and income-support programs for the poor and disabled. Remember all the hoopla over those from the liberal base?
A further $480 billion in cuts over 12 years in federal health care spending, on top of the $1 trillion in cost-cutting already imposed to pay for the health care overhaul passed last year by a Democratic Congress. Obama outlined a series of policy changes in health care that he said would cut an additional $1 trillion in the decade after 2023. Who was paying attention to that concession?
In the event that spending cuts fail to reduce the federal deficit to the desired proportion of the US gross domestic product by 2014, Obama would establish a debt failsafe mechanism that would trigger across-the-board spending cuts and tax increases, likely to include a national sales tax or European-style Value Added Tax.
Cuts of $400 billion in military spending over 12 years, less than 4% of the gargantuan sum that the Pentagon, Department of Energy, Department of Homeland Security, CIA and other agencies will spend during that period on the armed forces, nuclear weapons and intelligence and security operations.
So there.
time for a recap...how did we get here, July 12th?
October 1st 2010- democrats do not approve a budget for 2011.
Nov. 2010- democrats lose house.
Noc. 2010- Obama cuts deal for an extension of the bush tax cuts, 2% payroll reduction for 2 years.
Jan. 2011 state of union. Wapo, NY Times remark that Obama has not addressed the deficit and has kick the can down the road proposing a 3.7 Trillion budget.
Feb thru April 2011- debates between dems and reps. crafting a budget for the rest of the 2011 year, because there was no budget ( see above) and the gov. was being funded by ongoing resolutions, final agreement 38.5 billion ( on an approx. 3.3 trillion budget) Harry Reid declared the deal "historic."
-June debt ceiling discussions start. Deadline August 2. (adjusted). Obama calls for what would be an effective repeal of bush tax cuts as part of the debt. ceiling deal.
** Points;
- There is no budget submitted by the WH for 2012 as required ( budget due for approval by Oct. 1 2011).
- There is no Medicare fund adjustment submittal due by law from the WH.
- Reps apparently want a restructure of Medicare funding and budget cuts, are seen as holding the nation hostage because they will not agree to tax increases in the debt ceiling deal, even though obamacare has baked in numerous increases on those very wealthy whom the dems want to increase taxs on, again.
- Year 2011 budget cuts on paper and signed off- 38.5 billion.
You left out something else. Congress's refusal to accept the debt commission's recommendations, although it was the BEST blueprint to get things moving.
Senate votes down debt commission - Jan. 26, 2010
They'd much rather bicker over ideology than reality, and here we are. Still.The bill had garnered bipartisan support as well as the backing of President Obama.
But it drew criticism from some influential conservative and liberal groups, as well as a number of top lawmakers such as Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
Conservatives didn't like it because they were sure the commission would lean too heavily on tax increases to help close the looming fiscal shortfalls. Liberals were equally convinced the commission would lean too heavily on draconian spending cuts, particularly in Medicare and Social Security.
Some lawmakers didn't like it because they saw the commission as usurping their authority and the obligations of Congress.
yes indeed, and?
whose debt commission was that btw? please direct me to Obama sppt for such?
