Republicans reject their own deficit-reduction report

Susan45

Member
Jun 1, 2011
362
37
16
Republicans reject their own deficit-reduction report

By the end of the debt-ceiling negotiations, the Obama administration had agreed to a deal that would reduce the deficit by $2.4 trillion, with $2 trillion of the total coming from spending cuts and $400 billion coming from tax increases. Taxes, in other words, would be about 17 percent of the final deal. Republicans rejected it. But as little as four months ago, it was the Republican ideal.

Mike Konczal points us to “Spend Less, Owe Less, Grow the Economy,” the March 2011 report released by the Republicans on the Joint Economic Committee. The report, which tried to argue that fiscal austerity would lead to short-term growth, was as methodologically unsound, and quickly forgotten. But for our purposes, that’s irrelevant. What is relevant is the report’s golden ratio: “successful fiscal consolidations averaged 85% spending cuts and 15% revenue increases, while unsuccessful fiscal consolidations averaged 47% spending cuts and 53% revenue increases,” it concluded. There was even a graph:

republican%20jec%20graph.jpg


So when the GOP’s economic policy team sat down to make the strongest case they could for growth-inducing deficit reduction, they recommended a mix an 85:15 mix, not a 100:0 mix. And then, when the Obama administration agreed to an 83:17 mix, the Republican leadership walked out of the room and demanded that taxes be excluded from the deal altogether. How do you negotiate with that?

Republicans reject their own deficit-reduction report - Ezra Klein - The Washington Post

It almost looks like some people are starting to pay attention.
 
Last edited:
The worst part is the base.

The people on here will accept any lie in place of facing the facts
 
The worst part is the base.

The people on here will accept any lie in place of facing the facts

Two projection alerts in a row! We are going for a record!

Bush was called a liar before he was even elected President, because Clinton got caught in a lie.

A very old playbook. But I guess when nothing else works...run with it.
 
The GOP is far more concerned about their party and politics than they are with the future of this country. Their stated purpose from the beginning has been to defeat Obama. They are indignant that a Black Man had the audacity to run for the White House and incredulous that he actually won.

There is nothing that won't do to get rid of Obama, even to the point of pushing this country into default. The Tea Baggers have establishment Republicans running scared.
 
The GOP is far more concerned about their party and politics than they are with the future of this country. Their stated purpose from the beginning has been to defeat Obama. They are indignant that a Black Man had the audacity to run for the White House and incredulous that he actually won.

There is nothing that won't do to get rid of Obama, even to the point of pushing this country into default. The Tea Baggers have establishment Republicans running scared.

Accusations of racism are on page two of the playbook. It is still an old playbook.
 
The GOP is far more concerned about their party and politics than they are with the future of this country. Their stated purpose from the beginning has been to defeat Obama. They are indignant that a Black Man had the audacity to run for the White House and incredulous that he actually won.

There is nothing that won't do to get rid of Obama, even to the point of pushing this country into default. The Tea Baggers have establishment Republicans running scared.

Getting rid of Obama. What a concept.
I can't imagine another four years of this vacationing tool.
 
The GOP was for the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission before they were against the recommendations.
As much as the GOP flip-flops, they must think they are John Kerry!

Obamas Simpson-Bowles Commission? The one he formed? Who woulda thunk.
 
In about a month, if nothing is done, the federal government will hit its legal debt limit. There will be dire consequences if this limit isn’t raised. At best, we’ll suffer an economic slowdown; at worst we’ll plunge back into the depths of the 2008-9 financial crisis.


Last December, after Mr. Obama agreed to extend the Bush tax cuts — a move that many people, myself included, viewed as in effect a concession to Republican blackmail — Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic asked why the deal hadn’t included a rise in the debt limit, so as to forestall another hostage situation (my words, not Mr. Ambinder’s).


But confidence isn’t the only thing at stake. Failure to raise the debt limit would also force the U.S. government to make drastic, immediate spending cuts, on a scale that would dwarf the austerity currently being imposed on Greece. And don’t believe the nonsense about the benefits of spending cuts that has taken over much of our public discourse: slashing spending at a time when the economy is deeply depressed would destroy hundreds of thousands and quite possibly millions of jobs.


Bear in mind that G.O.P. leaders don’t actually care about the level of debt. Instead, they’re using the threat of a debt crisis to impose an ideological agenda. If you had any doubt about that, last week’s tantrum should have convinced you. Democrats engaged in debt negotiations argued that since we’re supposedly in dire fiscal straits, we should talk about limiting tax breaks for corporate jets and hedge-fund managers as well as slashing aid to the poor and unlucky. And Republicans, in response, walked out of the talks.



Republicans believe, in short, that they’ve got Mr. Obama’s number, that he may still live in the White House but that for practical purposes his presidency is already over. It’s time — indeed, long past time — for him to prove them wrong.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/01/opinion/01krugman.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

I read several economists every week and so far haven't found one that thinks it's a good thing to not raise the limit. Schumer is right, they prefer beating Obama to helping the country.

As a liberal, I hope the president remains strong.
 
The GOP was for the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission before they were against the recommendations.
As much as the GOP flip-flops, they must think they are John Kerry!

Obamas Simpson-Bowles Commission? The one he formed? Who woulda thunk.

Oh give me a friggen break! It was bi-partisan in the truest sense. A huge majority of economists of all stripes agreed with the commissions recommendations. And the GOP was one of those who agreed with the recommendations. That's a fact, jack!
 
The GOP was for the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission before they were against the recommendations.
As much as the GOP flip-flops, they must think they are John Kerry!

Obamas Simpson-Bowles Commission? The one he formed? Who woulda thunk.

Oh give me a friggen break! It was bi-partisan in the truest sense. A huge majority of economists of all stripes agreed with the commissions recommendations. And the GOP was one of those who agreed with the recommendations. That's a fact, jack!

Everyone on both sides knew it would be ignored by both sides as soon as it was formed. It was window dressing. That's a fact , jack.
 
This was posted on a different thread.

Could Obama ignore Congress if they refuse to raise the debt ceiling? Yes, and he should, some experts say | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

As both major parties debate their conditions for raising the nation's debt ceiling, some Senate Democrats and constitutional scholars are questioning whether the limit is constitutional in the first place.

Delaware Sen. Chris Coons told The Huffington Post this week that he's part of a group of lawmakers now examining whether, in the case that debt negotiations fail, the Treasury could ignore Congress and continue paying its bills on time.

"This is an issue that's been raised in some private debate between senators as to whether in fact we can default, or whether that provision of the Constitution can be held up as preventing default," Coons told Huffington Post reporters Ryan Grim and Samuel Haass. "t's going to get a pretty strong second look as a way of saying, 'Is there some way to save us from ourselves?' "

Critics of the debt limit cite the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which states: "the validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."



Interesting...hummm...
 
I hope the debt ceiling doesn't get raised. I want to see what will happen and which side made the right prediction.
 
Obamas Simpson-Bowles Commission? The one he formed? Who woulda thunk.

Oh give me a friggen break! It was bi-partisan in the truest sense. A huge majority of economists of all stripes agreed with the commissions recommendations. And the GOP was one of those who agreed with the recommendations. That's a fact, jack!

Everyone on both sides knew it would be ignored by both sides as soon as it was formed. It was window dressing. That's a fact , jack.

That's because we have stubborn, ideology over country jack-asses in Washington. They have no balls and are so afraid to veer away from their failed ideologies. About every economists is saying cut spending and raise revenue. But noooo! The GOP will never raise taxes and the Dems will never cut spending. Those fuckers are worthless and will never come up with a ballsy solution. And the US continues it's downwards slide while Congress fiddles.
 

Forum List

Back
Top