What we've lost in the partisan budget debate

[8537]

Over the past few months as the debt limit debate heated up, both sides have offered a host of meaningful reforms that cross party lines. Instead of getting any of those reforms passed, it appears we will either default or pass a tepid bill full of potential cuts that may or may not occur in future Congresses.

Meanwhile, we've left the following on the cutting room floor - ideas that many in both parties support:

1. Cutting government subsidies for profitable private sector oil, agriculture and energy initiatives.

2. Reforming SS and Medicare to make them sustainable for decades to come.

3. Reforming the tax code to reduce rates, remove exemptions and create a more efficient tax system.

4. Cutting spending on unnecessary defense programs.

I'm sure there are many, many more. What else have we left on the table?

In the end, we will achieve zero of these things and maintain the decades-long status quo, strictly for partisan political reasons. A massive opportunity lost to the extreme wings of both parties who have pulled their leadership away from the negotiating table and into their ideological corners.

 

[uscitizen]

We do not have a functioning government right now.

 

[8537]

We do not have a functioning government right now.

Unfortunately, we haven't really had one in quite some time. This situation really demonstrated that fact - we had a spectacular opportunity to make big changes that both sides agree upon, and it was tossed aside; in large part because neither side wants to be seen agreeing with the other.

Politics often trumps good policy, but in this case the results are incredibly damaging. The potential reward of collaboration was significant for all Americans.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

 

[uscitizen]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

show me one bill submitted by Bush to reform SS?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

show me one bill submitted by Bush to reform SS?

Are you denying Bush suggested partial privatization of Social Security?

 

[Jarhead]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

show me one bill submitted by Bush to reform SS?

a bill?
Wasn't he the president?

He made a suggestion to congress but becuase he did not write a bill (do conresses job) then he must not have made the suggestion?

Ok.

 

[Jarhead]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

No offense...but the spin goes both ways.

The dems and the GOP spoin the intentions of both sides so often, none of us really know what the truth is.

And the media? Thsy no longer investigate for the truth...they like to report on the sensationalism...

What sounds better for a news report...

1) The GOP has an idea that may create millions of jobs
or
2) The GOP do not care about the poor. They have an idea that will make the wealthiest even wealthier

 

[Jarhead]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

show me one bill submitted by Bush to reform SS?

Are you denying Bush suggested partial privatization of Social Security?

Seems only Al Gore knew about the suggestion.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

Over the past few months as the debt limit debate heated up, both sides have offered a host of meaningful reforms that cross party lines. Instead of getting any of those reforms passed, it appears we will either default or pass a tepid bill full of potential cuts that may or may not occur in future Congresses.

Meanwhile, we've left the following on the cutting room floor - ideas that many in both parties support:

1. Cutting government subsidies for profitable private sector oil, agriculture and energy initiatives.

2. Reforming SS and Medicare to make them sustainable for decades to come.

3. Reforming the tax code to reduce rates, remove exemptions and create a more efficient tax system.

4. Cutting spending on unnecessary defense programs.

I'm sure there are many, many more. What else have we left on the table?

In the end, we will achieve zero of these things and maintain the decades-long status quo, strictly for partisan political reasons. A massive opportunity lost to the extreme wings of both parties who have pulled their leadership away from the negotiating table and into their ideological corners.

You are correct. It is a shame how partisanship is destroying our system.

 

[Jarhead]

Over the past few months as the debt limit debate heated up, both sides have offered a host of meaningful reforms that cross party lines. Instead of getting any of those reforms passed, it appears we will either default or pass a tepid bill full of potential cuts that may or may not occur in future Congresses.

Meanwhile, we've left the following on the cutting room floor - ideas that many in both parties support:

1. Cutting government subsidies for profitable private sector oil, agriculture and energy initiatives.

2. Reforming SS and Medicare to make them sustainable for decades to come.

3. Reforming the tax code to reduce rates, remove exemptions and create a more efficient tax system.

4. Cutting spending on unnecessary defense programs.

I'm sure there are many, many more. What else have we left on the table?

In the end, we will achieve zero of these things and maintain the decades-long status quo, strictly for partisan political reasons. A massive opportunity lost to the extreme wings of both parties who have pulled their leadership away from the negotiating table and into their ideological corners.

You are correct. It is a shame how partisanship is destroying our system.

I disagree....to a point.

I believe Partisanship created our system. Debate is healthy and required.
Spin of the other sides intentions is destroying our system.

 

[8537]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

Bush's plan didn't make the fiscal position of SS better. In fact, it made it worse in the short term by over a trillion dollars.

 

[Avatar4321]

Amazing that there are people who will resist the cuts and reforms necessary to fix our current overspending problem only to burden the American people with more taxes.

 

[8537]

Over the past few months as the debt limit debate heated up, both sides have offered a host of meaningful reforms that cross party lines. Instead of getting any of those reforms passed, it appears we will either default or pass a tepid bill full of potential cuts that may or may not occur in future Congresses.

Meanwhile, we've left the following on the cutting room floor - ideas that many in both parties support:

1. Cutting government subsidies for profitable private sector oil, agriculture and energy initiatives.

2. Reforming SS and Medicare to make them sustainable for decades to come.

3. Reforming the tax code to reduce rates, remove exemptions and create a more efficient tax system.

4. Cutting spending on unnecessary defense programs.

I'm sure there are many, many more. What else have we left on the table?

In the end, we will achieve zero of these things and maintain the decades-long status quo, strictly for partisan political reasons. A massive opportunity lost to the extreme wings of both parties who have pulled their leadership away from the negotiating table and into their ideological corners.

You are correct. It is a shame how partisanship is destroying our system.

I disagree....to a point.

I believe Partisanship created our system. Debate is healthy and required.
Spin of the other sides intentions is destroying our system.

I certainly agree that debate is healthy. But Kiki mentioned partisanship, and i think s/he is right that it's partisanship that is destroying the system - it's the intense partisanship that creating the spin of the other side's intentions.

You can have an active, engaged debate of the issues without partisanship (well I should say it used to be that way...) These days, the partisan divide frames the debate - to the extent that both Obama and Boehner agreed to a whole series of reforms before the extremes in their parties pulled them away from the table for partisan reasons.

 

[Full-Auto]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

Bush's plan didn't make the fiscal position of SS better. In fact, it made it worse in the short term by over a trillion dollars.

How does not having any money in the trust, become worse?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

We're now informed that there is no Social Security Trust Fund so we're looking at a worse than Madoff 100% Loss of our principal.

How do you want us to react? Flowers? Pom Poms?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

Bush's plan didn't make the fiscal position of SS better. In fact, it made it worse in the short term by over a trillion dollars.

So we're better off with a 100% loss of principal? Is that right?

How the fuck is letting people keep their own money a "loss"?

 

[8537]

We're now informed that there is no Social Security Trust Fund so we're looking at a worse than Madoff 100% Loss of our principal.

How do you want us to react? Flowers? Pom Poms?

The Social Security Trust Fund, like any trust fund, was invested for use at a later date. As it happens, it was invested in special-issue US treasuries.

 

[8537]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

Bush's plan didn't make the fiscal position of SS better. In fact, it made it worse in the short term by over a trillion dollars.

How does not having any money in the trust, become worse?

By removing some of the expected future revenues to the trust.

 

[uscitizen]

Odd that when Bush tried to reform Social Security by allowing people to put a portion of it in a real trust fund he was excoriated, lambasted, pilloried, mocked, ridiculed, derided, denounced, criticized, berated, rebuked, censured, reviled, chastised, condemned, lectured, castigated, upbraided and vilified that he dared to question the sanctity of the Social Security Trust Fund.

Al Gore called it a "Risky scheme" to let people keep some of their own money.

Yeah, we lost a lot, trillions by my counting, because of Dem demagoguery.

show me one bill submitted by Bush to reform SS?

Are you denying Bush suggested partial privatization of Social Security?

"suggesting" is not the same thing as "trying to" now is it?

I suggested that invading Iraq was a mistake.