Repubs Propose $2.5 TRILLION Cuts..

[Claudette]

I think we should all be applauding them for proposing any cuts at this point. They're finally headed in the right direction. I have to be content with this new direction. It really is a start. The Democrats are going to do everything in their power to stop the Republicans from making any real cuts. They're going to paint them as "Evil Ogres" & "Nazis" to their Welfare entitlement sheep. And of course their Welfare sheep are going to eat that shit up. So cutting anything is going to be an incredibly difficult challenge. We'll just have to take what we can get at this point. It wont be exactly what we want but it is something. I applaud the Republicans for at least accepting reality and trying to do something. I really do hope they're successful.

I agree.

I don't think they will get this through the Senate but its a start and I'm glad to see them keeping their promise.

If it doesn't get through asshole Reid and the Senate the taxpayers will know who's to blame.

We seriously need to cut spending and everything should be on the table.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I think we should all be applauding them for proposing any cuts at this point. They're finally headed in the right direction. I have to be content with this new direction. It really is a start. The Democrats are going to do everything in their power to stop the Republicans from making any real cuts. They're going to paint them as "Evil Ogres" & "Nazis" to their Welfare entitlement sheep. And of course their Welfare sheep are going to eat that shit up. So cutting anything is going to be an incredibly difficult challenge. We'll just have to take what we can get at this point. It wont be exactly what we want but it is something. I applaud the Republicans for at least accepting reality and trying to do something. I really do hope they're successful.

That's as it always will be. Next on the list is making sure "EVERYONE" is a taxpayer again. No more "tax receivers". Even the homeless guy on the street corner outside can afford a buck a year. Time for everyone to get out of the cart and start pushing!

I think when everyone starts paying even a little, it will go a long way to changing attitudes. (Psst, I think the Dems think so too!)

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Lots more that needs to be cut... but it is a start.. that is as long as they follow through as much as they can... and the left winger congresspersons (and Obama) don't try and thwart in their little class warfare games they have to keep up for the entitlement junkies

Oh the winger Democrats are going to play their little class warfare games. You can bet on that. They're going to paint the Republicans as "Evil Ogres" and "Nazis" to their Welfare entitlement sheep. That's what they always do. And their Welfare sheep are going to eat that shit up. It's going to be incredibly difficult for the Republicans to make any real cuts. The Democrats are going to fight them at every turn. But hey,at least they're trying. That's what they were elected to do and i think most will respect their efforts. Btw,i like your "Entitlement Junkies" term. Spot-On.

 

[midcan5]

Deficits ???? LOL I think we know who caused these deficit and when it happened you tools said nothing. What woke you?

U.S. Federal Deficits and Presidents
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

 

[Tech_Esq]

I really think across the board cuts should probably be made, but I do wonder how well researched this is also. It's pointless to make a cut which will end up costing us *more* in the long-run due to the back-end effects, and I seriously hope that those would be studied before making any moves.

Anything the Feds can COMPLETELY get out of the business of, is worth the up front cost.

 

[G.T.]

I really think across the board cuts should probably be made, but I do wonder how well researched this is also. It's pointless to make a cut which will end up costing us *more* in the long-run due to the back-end effects, and I seriously hope that those would be studied before making any moves.

Anything the Feds can COMPLETELY get out of the business of, is worth the up front cost.

That sounds nice, but I'm sure that it's not completely true.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Deficits ???? LOL I think we know who caused these deficit and when it happened you tools said nothing. What woke you?

U.S. Federal Deficits and Presidents
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

What awoke us? An idiot who quadrupled on one of the biggest spendthrifts this country has had and tried to blame it on someone else. That's enough to wake the dead!

 

[DiamondDave]

Deficits ???? LOL I think we know who caused these deficit and when it happened you tools said nothing. What woke you?

U.S. Federal Deficits and Presidents
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

What awoke us? An idiot who quadrupled on one of the biggest spendthrifts this country has had and tried to blame it on someone else. That's enough to wake the dead!

Ummm... if anyone of these guys think it is ONLY the Prez causing any financial issues with government spending, they are SADLY mistaken

And I really don't see anyone defending W's economic or spending record... nor did they see very many conservatives defending it then

 

[shintao]

...in spending.

Read it and weep, Dimocrats.. You're being set up. Republicans got elected in November because you nitwits spent gobs of money we don't have and the public didn't want you to. Now they're proposing to keep their promises to those who voted for them, and Dims of course will fight to keep them from doing so. And all the while the voters will be watching and listening to them as the '12 elections get closer every day.

House GOP Lists $2.5 Trillion in Spending Cuts - US News and World Report

I hope the Democrats go for it, Slash & Burn, and demand the military be returned to US soil, and cut their budget 90%. That foreign aid be ended. That corporate aid and regulations be ended, and sever their umbilical (imbecile) cord.

Then lets see who votes for this beautiful reduction in expenses. Lets get serious people, gut the budget. Call your reps and make demands.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I really think across the board cuts should probably be made, but I do wonder how well researched this is also. It's pointless to make a cut which will end up costing us *more* in the long-run due to the back-end effects, and I seriously hope that those would be studied before making any moves.

Anything the Feds can COMPLETELY get out of the business of, is worth the up front cost.

That sounds nice, but I'm sure that it's not completely true.

If you leave it alive, someone will take it up years later and then baseline budgeting gets a hold of it and spending spirals out of control. That's the history of federal budget for the last 50 years.

In the long run, the less government does, the cheaper it will be. The more it does the more expensive it will be. Period. I don't care if the pay back period is 25 years or 50 years, with any luck the country will be around for longer than that, therefore it's cheaper to bite the bullet now than it would be later.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Deficits ???? LOL I think we know who caused these deficit and when it happened you tools said nothing. What woke you?

U.S. Federal Deficits and Presidents
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

What awoke us? An idiot who quadrupled on one of the biggest spendthrifts this country has had and tried to blame it on someone else. That's enough to wake the dead!

Ummm... if anyone of these guys think it is ONLY the Prez causing any financial issues with government spending, they are SADLY mistaken

And I really don't see anyone defending W's economic or spending record... nor did they see very many conservatives defending it then

True, but it's the big lie the Dems like delude themselves (and hopefully others) with.

 

[Foxfyre]

So i noticed this is over the next 10 years.

How about THIS year?

They have to pass something that the more liberal Republicans can swallow, that a Democratic Senate will have a tough time refuting with any credibility, and that a Democratic President will have tough time refusing to sign. Then they can go after another tier of cuts.

That is how the reformer GOP class of 1994 did it. They didn't go after everything all at once but just kept pushing until we actually achieved the most balanced budget this country had seen in a long, long time. They did have the advantage of having both houses of Congress and, though he was a Democrat, President Clinton cared more about looking good than he cared about much of anything else. (He vetoed welfare reform three times before he was convinced he would look good signing it, but he was finally convinced.)

The GOP House can only do so much and they can either do what is possible or grandstand. I think they are opting for what is possible. So far I am pleased that they aren't allowing the Senate or President to dictate what they will and will not pass.

 

[G.T.]

Anything the Feds can COMPLETELY get out of the business of, is worth the up front cost.

That sounds nice, but I'm sure that it's not completely true.

If you leave it alive, someone will take it up years later and then baseline budgeting gets a hold of it and spending spirals out of control. That's the history of federal budget for the last 50 years.

In the long run, the less government does, the cheaper it will be. The more it does the more expensive it will be. Period. I don't care if the pay back period is 25 years or 50 years, with any luck the country will be around for longer than that, therefore it's cheaper to bite the bullet now than it would be later.

That's all huff puff man. It's true for a lot of things, but not for all.

 

[shintao]

Deficits ???? LOL I think we know who caused these deficit and when it happened you tools said nothing. What woke you?

U.S. Federal Deficits and Presidents
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

What awoke us? An idiot who quadrupled on one of the biggest spendthrifts this country has had and tried to blame it on someone else. That's enough to wake the dead!

So if Obama spent no money, what would have happened? I just want to see if you are a bigger idiot than Obama, in a polite way.

 

[Tech_Esq]

That sounds nice, but I'm sure that it's not completely true.

If you leave it alive, someone will take it up years later and then baseline budgeting gets a hold of it and spending spirals out of control. That's the history of federal budget for the last 50 years.

In the long run, the less government does, the cheaper it will be. The more it does the more expensive it will be. Period. I don't care if the pay back period is 25 years or 50 years, with any luck the country will be around for longer than that, therefore it's cheaper to bite the bullet now than it would be later.

That's all huff puff man. It's true for a lot of things, but not for all.

Ok, I'll bite, which one?

 

[shintao]

Anything the Feds can COMPLETELY get out of the business of, is worth the up front cost.

That sounds nice, but I'm sure that it's not completely true.

If you leave it alive, someone will take it up years later and then baseline budgeting gets a hold of it and spending spirals out of control. That's the history of federal budget for the last 50 years.

In the long run, the less government does, the cheaper it will be. The more it does the more expensive it will be. Period. I don't care if the pay back period is 25 years or 50 years, with any luck the country will be around for longer than that, therefore it's cheaper to bite the bullet now than it would be later.

Didn't Haliburton teach you any lessons???

 

[DiamondDave]

That sounds nice, but I'm sure that it's not completely true.

If you leave it alive, someone will take it up years later and then baseline budgeting gets a hold of it and spending spirals out of control. That's the history of federal budget for the last 50 years.

In the long run, the less government does, the cheaper it will be. The more it does the more expensive it will be. Period. I don't care if the pay back period is 25 years or 50 years, with any luck the country will be around for longer than that, therefore it's cheaper to bite the bullet now than it would be later.

Didn't Haliburton teach you any lessons???

And the contracts of Haliburton you are complaining about were created and put out by what entity again???

Fucking idiot.... jump off a bridge, it's not worth the effort

 

[Tech_Esq]

Deficits ???? LOL I think we know who caused these deficit and when it happened you tools said nothing. What woke you?

U.S. Federal Deficits and Presidents
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

What awoke us? An idiot who quadrupled on one of the biggest spendthrifts this country has had and tried to blame it on someone else. That's enough to wake the dead!

So if Obama spent no money, what would have happened? I just want to see if you are abigger idiot than Obama, in a polite way.

Depends on whose definition of "spend money" you want to use. Democrats like to call tax cuts (you know letting the people who earn the money keep it) "spending". Of course any thinking person would know that's not the case. If the people keep it, it's always there for the government to tax if they need it. If however, the government takes the money, and then spends it on -- Oh I don't know....let's say a "shovel ready project boondoggle" then the money is gone. They've taken from the people who have it and squandered it on something that did nothing. Spitting in the ocean, you might say.

So, if Obama didn't spend the money, that he had a choice in, then maybe he would have focused on creating a stable economic environment by not creating a regulatory nightmare with the prospect of cap and trade and promising to insert government in health care (creating more uncertainty). With regulatory certainty in place, he could have focused on financial reform without damaging the whole economy. (Something that was needed, but we only got about half of, and the wrong half at that). Then he could have goosed the economy with some smart targeted and limited tax cuts over two year (which would have been plenty two years ago. That's somewhat doubtful now).

So, that's what he could have done. But then he wouldn't be a Democrat if he had done that, would he?

 

[Tech_Esq]

That sounds nice, but I'm sure that it's not completely true.

If you leave it alive, someone will take it up years later and then baseline budgeting gets a hold of it and spending spirals out of control. That's the history of federal budget for the last 50 years.

In the long run, the less government does, the cheaper it will be. The more it does the more expensive it will be. Period. I don't care if the pay back period is 25 years or 50 years, with any luck the country will be around for longer than that, therefore it's cheaper to bite the bullet now than it would be later.

Didn't Haliburton teach you any lessons???

Troll

 

[rightwinger]

...in spending.

Read it and weep, Dimocrats.. You're being set up. Republicans got elected in November because you nitwits spent gobs of money we don't have and the public didn't want you to. Now they're proposing to keep their promises to those who voted for them, and Dims of course will fight to keep them from doing so. And all the while the voters will be watching and listening to them as the '12 elections get closer every day.

House GOP Lists $2.5 Trillion in Spending Cuts - US News and World Report

I've got an easier cut...

Why make cuts that assist millions of Americans?

Cut Afghanistan and Iraq and you will save $2.5 trillion in ten years