Who Can Tackle the Big Beast (Deficit)? Romney or Obama?

[California Girl]

How will the next President tackle the ‘big beast’?

The ‘big beast’… or deficit, to you… will be the major issue for whoever our next President is.

Obama wants to spend our way out of recession. Romney wants to cut our way out of recession. Which is the better way?

In my view, Obama screwed up from the ‘git go’ by focusing on healthcare instead of an economy in freefall. Yea, the healthcare thing needed fixing – and he promised his base that he would address that as a priority. Unfortunately, for Obama, he appeared to not notice that the world was collapsing around his feet. So, along comes the stimulus… for the record, I loathed the idea but agreed with him on that… we desperately needed to stimulate the economy. I had my reservations, because politicians generally have a habit of taking a good idea and completely fucking it up. Hey presto, that is exactly what happened with the US stimulus. Instead of being spent on infrastructure and value adding projects, he pissed away billion after billion of our money on pet projects that did next to nothing to ‘stimulate’ anything other than his left wing bullshit.

So let’s look at Romney.

Gaffe prone, clumsy, very much a self made multi-millionaire, a DC ‘outsider’, leader of a very liberal state. He says he’ll cut federal spending to 20% of GDP. Good idea, but is it practical to do that when our economy is already in the tank (and it is – despite the weeping, wailing and stamping of feet from the left insisting that it isn’t… get a clue, lefties… it’s tanking. And it will continue to tank for quite some time.) But how do you cut the federal budget when the country has no jobs, no prospect of jobs in the short-medium term and a growing… and aging… population? He says he’ll cut ‘entitlement’ programs (foodstamps, Medicaid, etc)… but, again, how can he do that when the country is facing such a bleak decade?

OK… back to Obama… re-elect someone who fiddled while Rome burned? We cannot afford any more expansion of federal government. Anyone who says otherwise, can’t do basic math,.

So, what say you… do we continue to expand federal government and implode? Or do we take our medicine in the hopes that our children will have it easier because we made the hard choice?

Self Sacrifice Conservatism or Cradle to Grave Liberal Government?

The size of the state: A big beast to tackle | The Economist

For the record, I have not 'cut and paste' from the article... I've talked about the issues and this article gives some solid, factually accurate, balanced information regarding both Obama and Romney. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you open a debate.

 

[Wiseacre]

" So, what say you… do we continue to expand federal government and implode? Or do we take our medicine in the hopes that our children will have it easier because we made the hard choice? "


Liberals are always talking about morality, but how moral is it to create such large debts that will be passed on to future generations? Our national debt is expected to go over 16 trillion buy the end of August; the entitlement programs in place now are clearly unsustainable, and yet democrats will not touch them. How immoral and irresponsible is that?

Some think we are entering or will shortly enter another recession; the WH and CBO put out rosy forecasts for future GDP and UE, but I'm not seeing reasons to think things will get much better, other than the normal ebb and flow of the markets. We've got a bad drought across the middle of the country, food prices are going to rise. What happens if there's a war in the ME, I'd say there's a very good chance of that in the next 12 months. What if there's another terrorist attack that is successful this time? How does the sequester affect that? What about interest rates, right now they're are record lows, but sooner or later those rates will go back up. What then, in 10 years our debt exceeds 25 trillion and we're paying over a trillion just in interest payments?

As I see it, we've gotta make our gov't and economy more efficient and productive. Gov't has to partner with Business to foster economic growth; less spending, less taxes, less regulation, less uncertainty, that has to be the way to go. Not all at once, but a gradual decline until our spending growth is less than our economic growth. I don't see Obama doing that to the extent that Romney will. Look around the world; the countries in the most trouble are the ones who have not, cannot, and will not control their spending.

 

[California Girl]

" So, what say you… do we continue to expand federal government and implode? Or do we take our medicine in the hopes that our children will have it easier because we made the hard choice? "


Liberals are always talking about morality, but how moral is it to create such large debts that will be passed on to future generations? Our national debt is expected to go over 16 trillion buy the end of August; the entitlement programs in place now are clearly unsustainable, and yet democrats will not touch them. How immoral and irresponsible is that?

Some think we are entering or will shortly enter another recession; the WH and CBO put out rosy forecasts for future GDP and UE, but I'm not seeing reasons to think things will get much better, other than the normal ebb and flow of the markets. We've got a bad drought across the middle of the country, food prices are going to rise. What happens if there's a war in the ME, I'd say there's a very good chance of that in the next 12 months. What if there's another terrorist attack that is successful this time? How does the sequester affect that? What about interest rates, right now they're are record lows, but sooner or later those rates will go back up. What then, in 10 years our debt exceeds 25 trillion and we're paying over a trillion just in interest payments?

As I see it, we've gotta make our gov't and economy more efficient and productive. Gov't has to partner with Business to foster economic growth; less spending, less taxes, less regulation, less uncertainty, that has to be the way to go. Not all at once, but a gradual decline until our spending growth is less than our economic growth. I don't see Obama doing that to the extent that Romney will. Look around the world; the countries in the most trouble are the ones who have not, cannot, and will not control their spending.

We are back in recession... we just haven't faced up to that yet. And the media are downplaying it... naturally... the timing sucks for Obama.

Personally, I think it is immoral to carry on pretending that we can afford the kind of programs that Obama's throwing out. Check out how much of the 'stimulus' went towards foodstamps... I appreciate Pelosi's claim that foodstamps stimulate the economy but, frankly, that is beyond ludicrous.

 

[mudwhistle]

Romney currently has a surplus in campaign funds and last report had Obama running at a $12 million dollar deficit. He's spending it faster than it's coming in.

How can he fix the economy if he can't even properly budget his campaign?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Obama has proven in the last 4 years that he has no intention of tackling the deficit. Each year he sets a new record on how high the deficit will go. He has supervised the Country in spending a deficit that equals in 4 years the amount that Bush added in 8. And his response is "well after I am out of office we have plans to cut the deficit."

Will Romney work to bring the deficit down? I don't know, but isn't it time we give a new person a chance to try? Since Obama has made no effort at all?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How will the next President tackle the ‘big beast’?

The ‘big beast’… or deficit, to you… will be the major issue for whoever our next President is.

Obama wants to spend our way out of recession. Romney wants to cut our way out of recession. Which is the better way?

In my view, Obama screwed up from the ‘git go’ by focusing on healthcare instead of an economy in freefall. Yea, the healthcare thing needed fixing – and he promised his base that he would address that as a priority. Unfortunately, for Obama, he appeared to not notice that the world was collapsing around his feet. So, along comes the stimulus… for the record, I loathed the idea but agreed with him on that… we desperately needed to stimulate the economy. I had my reservations, because politicians generally have a habit of taking a good idea and completely fucking it up. Hey presto, that is exactly what happened with the US stimulus. Instead of being spent on infrastructure and value adding projects, he pissed away billion after billion of our money on pet projects that did next to nothing to ‘stimulate’ anything other than his left wing bullshit.

So let’s look at Romney.

Gaffe prone, clumsy, very much a self made multi-millionaire, a DC ‘outsider’, leader of a very liberal state. He says he’ll cut federal spending to 20% of GDP. Good idea, but is it practical to do that when our economy is already in the tank (and it is – despite the weeping, wailing and stamping of feet from the left insisting that it isn’t… get a clue, lefties… it’s tanking. And it will continue to tank for quite some time.) But how do you cut the federal budget when the country has no jobs, no prospect of jobs in the short-medium term and a growing… and aging… population? He says he’ll cut ‘entitlement’ programs (foodstamps, Medicaid, etc)… but, again, how can he do that when the country is facing such a bleak decade?

OK… back to Obama… re-elect someone who fiddled while Rome burned? We cannot afford any more expansion of federal government. Anyone who says otherwise, can’t do basic math,.

So, what say you… do we continue to expand federal government and implode? Or do we take our medicine in the hopes that our children will have it easier because we made the hard choice?

Self Sacrifice Conservatism or Cradle to Grave Liberal Government?

The size of the state: A big beast to tackle | The Economist

For the record, I have not 'cut and paste' from the article... I've talked about the issues and this article gives some solid, factually accurate, balanced information regarding both Obama and Romney. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you open a debate.

Obama promised he was going to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. If you ask me, he has clearly demonstrated his ability to handle the deficit by all the work he has done to keep that promise.

 

[California Girl]

How will the next President tackle the ‘big beast’?

The ‘big beast’… or deficit, to you… will be the major issue for whoever our next President is.

Obama wants to spend our way out of recession. Romney wants to cut our way out of recession. Which is the better way?

In my view, Obama screwed up from the ‘git go’ by focusing on healthcare instead of an economy in freefall. Yea, the healthcare thing needed fixing – and he promised his base that he would address that as a priority. Unfortunately, for Obama, he appeared to not notice that the world was collapsing around his feet. So, along comes the stimulus… for the record, I loathed the idea but agreed with him on that… we desperately needed to stimulate the economy. I had my reservations, because politicians generally have a habit of taking a good idea and completely fucking it up. Hey presto, that is exactly what happened with the US stimulus. Instead of being spent on infrastructure and value adding projects, he pissed away billion after billion of our money on pet projects that did next to nothing to ‘stimulate’ anything other than his left wing bullshit.

So let’s look at Romney.

Gaffe prone, clumsy, very much a self made multi-millionaire, a DC ‘outsider’, leader of a very liberal state. He says he’ll cut federal spending to 20% of GDP. Good idea, but is it practical to do that when our economy is already in the tank (and it is – despite the weeping, wailing and stamping of feet from the left insisting that it isn’t… get a clue, lefties… it’s tanking. And it will continue to tank for quite some time.) But how do you cut the federal budget when the country has no jobs, no prospect of jobs in the short-medium term and a growing… and aging… population? He says he’ll cut ‘entitlement’ programs (foodstamps, Medicaid, etc)… but, again, how can he do that when the country is facing such a bleak decade?

OK… back to Obama… re-elect someone who fiddled while Rome burned? We cannot afford any more expansion of federal government. Anyone who says otherwise, can’t do basic math,.

So, what say you… do we continue to expand federal government and implode? Or do we take our medicine in the hopes that our children will have it easier because we made the hard choice?

Self Sacrifice Conservatism or Cradle to Grave Liberal Government?

The size of the state: A big beast to tackle | The Economist

For the record, I have not 'cut and paste' from the article... I've talked about the issues and this article gives some solid, factually accurate, balanced information regarding both Obama and Romney. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you open a debate.

Obama promised he was going to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. If you ask me, he has clearly demonstrated his ability to handle the deficit by all the work he has done to keep that promise.

I deliberately left that out of my OP, I felt it was a tad unfair to hold that over his head... it was never, ever gonna happen. Anyone who believed it also owns swamp land in Florida.

 

[California Girl]

Obama has proven in the last 4 years that he has no intention of tackling the deficit. Each year he sets a new record on how high the deficit will go. He has supervised the Country in spending a deficit that equals in 4 years the amount that Bush added in 8. And his response is "well after I am out of office we have plans to cut the deficit."

Will Romney work to bring the deficit down? I don't know, but isn't it time we give a new person a chance to try? Since Obama has made no effort at all?

Honestly, I don't see how he can bring it down, not while we're tanking... it would cost more than it saves us. However, I believe he can - and will - hold it where it is to a large degree. I don't expect miracles, I just expect him to take the issue a damned sight more seriously than the incumbent did.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

As long as the R congress refuses to work FOR America, nothing much can happen. Its easy to assume they'll suddenly change their ways if there the prez is R but all signs point to the opposite. If Mittens is elected, he has said he will go with the Ryan "plan" to bankrupt the country.

The Bush fiasco showed us how well that works. Higher taxes for the working class, much lower taxes for the 1% and a real depression. That's what Mittens/R have planned for us.

Add to that the FACT that Mittens has no real experience with much of anything. No, I don't count the tax bail out of the Olympics, the trash and burn of Bain or his failed and corrupt governorship.

Third reason why he would be a total failure is that he has taken enormous money from the worst players. He is now owned by them.

 

[California Girl]

As long as the R congress refuses to work FOR America, nothing much can happen. Its easy to assume they'll suddenly change their ways if there the prez is R but all signs point to the opposite. If Mittens is elected, he has said he will go with the Ryan "plan" to bankrupt the country.

The Bush fiasco showed us how well that works. Higher taxes for the working class, much lower taxes for the 1% and a real depression. That's what Mittens/R have planned for us.

Add to that the FACT that Mittens has no real experience with much of anything. No, I don't count the tax bail out of the Olympics, the trash and burn of Bain or his failed and corrupt governorship.

Third reason why he would be a total failure is that he has taken enormous money from the worst players. He is now owned by them.

You can, I presume, back up your claim that R's do not work FOR America? Solid source, please... no HuffPuff here.

 

[Avorysuds]

Give me a list of cuts Mitt wants to do, his budget grew spending over Obama's but something like 10 billion. Neither Obama nor Mitt can, will or want to "tackle the deficit."

No matter if Mitt's budget grows the deficit faster than Obama or not the fact of the matter is the cuts in spending have to be pretty massive, and Mitt wants to grow military spending... Meaning he would have to do even BIGGER social cuts and seeing as Mitt has not even said one single area that he will cut I just don't believe he can, will or wants to follow through with a balanced budget.

 

[Avorysuds]

As long as the R congress refuses to work FOR America, nothing much can happen. Its easy to assume they'll suddenly change their ways if there the prez is R but all signs point to the opposite. If Mittens is elected, he has said he will go with the Ryan "plan" to bankrupt the country.

The Bush fiasco showed us how well that works. Higher taxes for the working class, much lower taxes for the 1% and a real depression. That's what Mittens/R have planned for us.

Add to that the FACT that Mittens has no real experience with much of anything. No, I don't count the tax bail out of the Olympics, the trash and burn of Bain or his failed and corrupt governorship.

Third reason why he would be a total failure is that he has taken enormous money from the worst players. He is now owned by them.

I don't think that if your life depended on it that you could get a credible link to back up your claims... That should tell you something.

 

[California Girl]

Since this is the 'clean' debate forum (always makes me snicker)... can we please refer to Obama as Obama and Romney as Romney. Respectful posting people.

 

[Wiseacre]

I know that Romney wants to avoid the sequestration cuts in military spending, but I have yet to see or hear where he proposed an increase in military spending. Somebody wanna provide a quote from him where he says that?

 

[Plasmaball]

Obama has proven in the last 4 years that he has no intention of tackling the deficit. Each year he sets a new record on how high the deficit will go. He has supervised the Country in spending a deficit that equals in 4 years the amount that Bush added in 8. And his response is "well after I am out of office we have plans to cut the deficit."

Will Romney work to bring the deficit down? I don't know, but isn't it time we give a new person a chance to try? Since Obama has made no effort at all?

how can you mess up with the stimulus and yet do nothing at the sametime.

its a contradiction.

 

[Sallow]

Historically Republicans have grown debt and deficits while Democrats have shrunk them.

And spending has not gone up all that much after Obama's first term. If the sequester survives..we should see big reductions to the debt and deficit. But Republicans are working overtime to nix it. That's after Boehner said he got 98% of what he wanted.

 

[Vidi]

The deficit cannot be dealt wuith through cuts alone. That is a pipedream. In order to get back into surplus so we can begin paying on the DEBT, we must cut spending AND raise taxes.

Anyone that tells you increasing taxes ALONE will get us out of this is wrong/
Anyone who tells you cutting spending ALONE is wrong.

They must BOTH be done.


That is simply the reality of it.


So to the original question: ROmney or Obama who is better suited to tackle the issue?

Which of the two is willing to do both cut spending AND raise taxes?

 

[Avatar4321]

Well, Romney has decades of experience doing exactly what we need to do the deficit.

Obama has just spent four years increasing it exponentially.

This is kind of a no brainer.

 

[Vidi]

Well, Romney has decades of experience doing exactly what we need to do the deficit.

Obama has just spent four years increasing it exponentially.

This is kind of a no brainer.

Please provide links to Romneys decades of experience.

 

[uscitizen]

Who Can Tackle the Big Beast (Deficit)? Romney or Obama?

Neither one of them.

And btw isn't this the job of congress? Not the job of the president?