GOP Pushes New Cuts

[RDD_1210]

Sure. Just as soon as the Dems and Obama do the same.

President Obama has put Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare concessions on the table. Or have you not been paying attention?

Sure its on the table but has anyone heard exactly what he's going to do?? What cust he and the Dems are willing to make??

I haven't and talk is cheap. The doing is what counts.

Its just to bad that all these hearing are going on behind closed door. I would like to see exactly what the Dems and Reps are pushing.

What happened to the most transparant administration in history??

Its anything but transparant.

But thats just the point. THE GOP will not even let tax increases be discussed.

 

[Claudette]

Sure. Lets raise everyones taxes. If revenue is the end result then everyone should share in the sacrifice.

Let the poor pony up as well. They sure have no problem taking all they can get.

 

[Trajan]

Sure. Just as soon as the Dems and Obama do the same.

President Obama has put Medicaid, Social Security, and Medicare concessions on the table. Or have you not been paying attention?

he has put tons 'on the table', how about a plan on paper ala harrys plan? Or apln where in his leadership ala harry and ancy say yea.



HBC Chairman Paul Ryan: “We got your re-analysis of the President’s budget. I won’t go back into that. But the President gave a speech on April 13th where he outlined a new budget framework that claims $4 trillion in deficit reduction over 12 years. Have you estimated the budget impact of this framework?”

CBO Director Doug Elmendorf: “No, Mr. Chairman. We don’t estimate speeches. We need much more specificity than was provided in that speech for us to do our analysis.”

Elmendorf on Obama budget framework: “We don’t estimate speeches.” « JCGOP-TN

 

[Article 15]

Sure. Lets raise everyones taxes.

Ok

 

[RDD_1210]

Sure. Lets raise everyones taxes. If revenue is the end result then everyone should share in the sacrifice.

Let the poor pony up as well. They sure have no problem taking all they can get.

Thats exactly what Obama tried to do when he wanted to let the Bush tax cuts expire. Remind us where you stood on that topic.

 

[Trajan]

how so?

Numerous grants have decreased or been cut completely. Meanwhile, students who attend public colleges are now paying a more significant amount in tuition because state governments are cutting that.

Compare the situation for a student entering college three to five years ago and today. There is a vast difference in several significant ways.

I knew thats what you would say or some derivation of. I even wrote this on a W doc. Ahead of your answer, how sad.

So, let me get this straight, if the gov. doesn’t give you a loan or that is guarantee it or lowers it, you have ‘sacrificed’?


What a perfect example of the ingrained ‘entitlement culture’ we have created. Not getting a loan of a certain value, or not getting a bigger, same or having a lowered, say Pell grant is now a hardship because you aren’t getting what YOU think you deserve, you have ‘sacrificed’?.




and full disclosure- I have a daughter in college, I know exactly what she gets, CANNOT get etc etc...guess how makes up the difference? and, thats life. No one promised me a thing.

 

[Claudette]

Since the rich earn the lion share of the income and hold a lion share of the wealth them paying the lion's share isn't much of a sacrifice.

Maybe she expects the poor to pay the lion share of the wealth?

Nope. Just skin in the game and a fair share.

If you don't pay anything you could care less what happens.

Your more apt to vote for those who will give you more and you do not care where the money comes from as long as it comes.

Free rides are never free. Someone has to pony up to make it happen.

 

[Chris]

Sure. Lets raise everyones taxes. If revenue is the end result then everyone should share in the sacrifice.

Let the poor pony up as well. They sure have no problem taking all they can get.

This kind of talk always cracks me up.

400 people control HALF the wealth in this country.

80% of the income increase in the last 40 years was given to the top 1%.

WHO DO YOU THINK IS TAKING ALL THEY CAN GET NOW???

THE POOR???

 

[auditor0007]

Debt Crisis Deepens as Eric Cantor, GOP Propose New Cuts - The Daily Beast

As Monday’s White House budget talks got down to the nitty-gritty, Eric Cantor proposed a series of spending cuts, one of them aimed squarely at college students.

The House majority leader, who did most of the talking for the Republican side, said those taking out student loans should start paying interest right away, rather than being able to defer payments until after graduation. It is a big-ticket item that would save $40 billion over 10 years.

At one point, sources say, President Obama pushed back against the mounting menu of spending cuts while the tax column on the negotiating sheets remained blank. He asked the Republican leaders how they expected him to take their proposals seriously.

“I’m not going to do that,” Obama said. “I’m not going to take money from old people and screw students,”

Republicans are resisting not just tax increases but significant cuts in defense spending, the sources say.

Obama returned to this theme in the talks, saying everyone is being asked to sacrifice except rich people. The Republicans repeated their belief that any tax increase would damage the fragile economy.

In his quest to save the rich from making sacrifices whatsoever, Cantor is now scraping the bottom of the barrel.

The problem with Cantor's idea to have Students pay the interest right away instead of deferring to graduation is the fact that students won't be able to pay for it.

A.) There's no jobs for said students currently.

B.) If students had the money to pay off the interest on these loans, they wouldn't be borrowing money from the government in the first place.

C.) It's not as if the students are getting free money. They eventually have to pay back said interest and loan payments. And guess what? Unlike the majority other forms of debt, they can't discharge it by declaring for bankruptcy. I wonder if Cantor realizes what this will do to the economy, I doubt he even cares.

D.) This is only going to save $4 billion a year. They already cut the grants that Students receive. Meanwhile, Cantor won't even touch the defense budget among other things including closing tax loopholes.

I don't see how anyone can take Cantor seriously, he has shown that he doesn't actually care about cutting our deficit.

What is so ludicrous about the Republican stance is that many of them want a balanced budget amendment. They are basically saying that we must live within our means, which currently is a bit over $2 trillion per year. Since we are spending approximately $1.6 trillion more than that, we must cut $1.6 trillion per year. That is not over ten years, it's for every year. What the Republicans are telling us is that we need to cut the government by 45% or nearly half.

Since the 1950's, the federal government has spent on average 18.5% of GDP. But because we continually borrowed from SS reserves over the last 30 years, that rate is misleading. It should be closer to 20% plus had we not borrowed all that money from SS. Now with SS and Medicare costs increasing due to having many more retirees and many more getting ready to retire, the Republicans are telling us that we need to reduce spending to no more than 15% of GDP.

This entire analogy is laughable any way you choose to look at it. Should spending be 25 to 30 percent of GDP? Absolutely not, and right now we are at 25 percent plus. So spending cuts are definitely needed. However, if we seriously look at our spending, we can see that 2 percent is directly due to an increase in military spending that is not and has not been paid for while we decided to fight two wars in the Middle East. Reduce military spending back to the normal 4% of GDP rather than 6%, and right there we have cut spending down to 23% of GDP.

In reality, we need to cut federal spending by 3% of GDP, but that will still leave us with a huge deficit. But that deficit is due entirely to a lack of revenue due to tax cuts that never did what we were told they would do, and that is increase revenue and create jobs. So on the other side of the coin, we must raise revenue, whether that be by increasing tax rates, or by closing a lot of loopholes that allow people to avoid paying much of what they should be paying.

In 2000, tax revenues were $2.0 trillion on GDP of $9.8 trillion. Last year, tax revenues were $2.1 trillion on GDP of $14.6 trillion. So while our economy grew by 49%, our tax revenue only grew by 5%. If we cannot see that this is entirely due to the failed tax policies which are the Bush tax cuts, then we it stands to reason that we are just absolutely blind.

Had tax revenues grown at the same rate as GDP, we would currently have an extra $1 trillion per year in revenue. That would still leave us short quite a bit, by approximately $700 billion, but $300 billion of that is military spending that is above normal based on a percentage of GDP. Bring that back down to 4% and now we are only short $400 billion per year.

The bottom line is that it is much easier to cut $400 billion in spending than it is to cut $1.7 trillion in spending. And lets keep in mind that we really only have $700 billion in excess spending compared to 2000. The rest of the shortfall is on the revenue side.

The bottom line is simple. Republicans want to cut spending to the lowest levels in 60 years at a time when SS and Medicare costs are increasing dramatically. Basically, it's a pipe dream. Spending cuts need to be made, and some long term cuts must be made to Medicare and possibly some small cuts to SS. But revenues must be increased, plain and simple, and the idea that we can't afford to do so is risking everything long term.

 

[Modbert]

So, let me get this straight, if the gov. doesn’t give you a loan or that is guarantee it or lowers it, you have ‘sacrificed’?

That's you putting words in my mouth. That way, you can set up the following:

What a perfect example of the ingrained ‘entitlement culture’ we have created. Not getting a loan of a certain value, or not getting a bigger, same or having a lowered, say Pew grant is now a hardship because you aren’t getting what YOU think you deserve, you have ‘sacrificed’?.

I never said I was owed anything. I was simply telling you to not act like college students have not had to endure cuts in the past couple years.

The whole reason I made this thread is because Cantor's plan doesn't make any sense whatsoever. When they say "save" $40 billion over 10 years ($4 billion a year) all that means is students will be paying interest now rather than a couple years down the road.

It's a gimmicky accounting trick. There is no real savings of any sort.

All this is going to do is make it more difficult for college students to accept loans and pay off those loans. It has no positive effect on the deficit whatsoever.

 

[Claudette]

Sure. Lets raise everyones taxes. If revenue is the end result then everyone should share in the sacrifice.

Let the poor pony up as well. They sure have no problem taking all they can get.

This kind of talk always cracks me up.

400 people control HALF the wealth in this country.

80% of the income increase in the last 40 years was given to the top 1%.

WHO DO YOU THINK IS TAKING ALL THEY CAN GET NOW???

THE POOR???

No. You just crack me up with your spin.

No one gives those people anything. They work and earn it.

You probably have some idle rich but most folks you catagorize as rich work and earn their money. They also pay the majority of the Fed taxes.

The poor pay for nothing yet they have no problem taking.

Before long the takers are going to outnumber the producers. Wonder what happens then??

 

[RDD_1210]

Sure. Lets raise everyones taxes. If revenue is the end result then everyone should share in the sacrifice.

Let the poor pony up as well. They sure have no problem taking all they can get.

Thats exactly what Obama tried to do when he wanted to let the Bush tax cuts expire. Remind us where you stood on that topic.

Claudette? No response?

Were you in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts expire?

 

[Claudette]

Bye all means lets raise taxes .We can then all sit back and see what happens to the economy.

Should be interesting if nothing else.

 

[WillowTree]

Debt Crisis Deepens as Eric Cantor, GOP Propose New Cuts - The Daily Beast

As Monday’s White House budget talks got down to the nitty-gritty, Eric Cantor proposed a series of spending cuts, one of them aimed squarely at college students.

The House majority leader, who did most of the talking for the Republican side, said those taking out student loans should start paying interest right away, rather than being able to defer payments until after graduation. It is a big-ticket item that would save $40 billion over 10 years.

At one point, sources say, President Obama pushed back against the mounting menu of spending cuts while the tax column on the negotiating sheets remained blank. He asked the Republican leaders how they expected him to take their proposals seriously.

“I’m not going to do that,” Obama said. “I’m not going to take money from old people and screw students,”

Republicans are resisting not just tax increases but significant cuts in defense spending, the sources say.

Obama returned to this theme in the talks, saying everyone is being asked to sacrifice except rich people. The Republicans repeated their belief that any tax increase would damage the fragile economy.

In his quest to save the rich from making sacrifices whatsoever, Cantor is now scraping the bottom of the barrel.

The problem with Cantor's idea to have Students pay the interest right away instead of deferring to graduation is the fact that students won't be able to pay for it.

A.) There's no jobs for said students currently.B.) If students had the money to pay off the interest on these loans, they wouldn't be borrowing money from the government in the first place.

C.) It's not as if the students are getting free money. They eventually have to pay back said interest and loan payments. And guess what? Unlike the majority other forms of debt, they can't discharge it by declaring for bankruptcy. I wonder if Cantor realizes what this will do to the economy, I doubt he even cares.

D.) This is only going to save $4 billion a year. They already cut the grants that Students receive. Meanwhile, Cantor won't even touch the defense budget among other things including closing tax loopholes.

I don't see how anyone can take Cantor seriously, he has shown that he doesn't actually care about cutting our deficit.

Edit:

Also, for all the "deficit hawks":

E.) It's a gimmicky accounting trick.

macadoodle could cut defense spending right now by ordering our troops stationed around the world HOME. Why doesn't he do dat?







No shit sherlock.. it's macadoodle's economy and their are no jobs.

 

[Modbert]

Bye all means lets raise taxes .We can then all sit back and see what happens to the economy.

Should be interesting if nothing else.

Have a response to this?

The whole reason I made this thread is because Cantor's plan doesn't make any sense whatsoever. When they say "save" $40 billion over 10 years ($4 billion a year) all that means is students will be paying interest now rather than a couple years down the road.

It's a gimmicky accounting trick. There is no real savings of any sort.

All this is going to do is make it more difficult for college students to accept loans and pay off those loans. It has no positive effect on the deficit whatsoever.

 

[RDD_1210]

Bye all means lets raise taxes .We can then all sit back and see what happens to the economy.

Should be interesting if nothing else.

So you were in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts expire?

 

[Claudette]

Sure. Lets raise everyones taxes. If revenue is the end result then everyone should share in the sacrifice.

Let the poor pony up as well. They sure have no problem taking all they can get.

Thats exactly what Obama tried to do when he wanted to let the Bush tax cuts expire. Remind us where you stood on that topic.

Claudette? No response?

Were you in favor of letting the Bush tax cuts expire?

Sorry. Missed your question.

I wasn't in favor of raising the taxes on only one group. If your gonna raise them, raise them on everyone.

Its not really a raise. Its just letting the tax cuts expire. Yep. I am in favor but for all.

Then lets just sit back and watch the economy. Should be interesting.

 

[Trajan]

So, let me get this straight, if the gov. doesn’t give you a loan or that is guarantee it or lowers it, you have ‘sacrificed’?

That's you putting words in my mouth. That way, you can set up the following:

What a perfect example of the ingrained ‘entitlement culture’ we have created. Not getting a loan of a certain value, or not getting a bigger, same or having a lowered, say Pew grant is now a hardship because you aren’t getting what YOU think you deserve, you have ‘sacrificed’?.

I never said I was owed anything. I was simply telling you to not act like college students have not had to endure cuts in the past couple years.

The whole reason I made this thread is because Cantor's plan doesn't make any sense whatsoever. When they say "save" $40 billion over 10 years ($4 billion a year) all that means is students will be paying interest now rather than a couple years down the road.

It's a gimmicky accounting trick. There is no real savings of any sort.

All this is going to do is make it more difficult for college students to accept loans and pay off those loans. It has no positive effect on the deficit whatsoever.

That's you putting words in my mouth.

really?

Modbert-In his quest to save the rich from making sacrifices whatsoever

Modbert-College students have already taken part in the "shared sacrifice."

Trajan- How so?

Modbert-Numerous grants have decreased or been cut completely. Meanwhile, students who attend public colleges are now paying a more significant amount in tuition because state governments are cutting that.

Compare the situation for a student entering college three to five years ago and today. There is a vast difference in several significant ways.



did you miss this-

I agree, the demand for ongoing interest payments immediately upon receipt is ridiculous.

 

[Modbert]

really?

Yeah really, you're going to have to show me where I said I was owed anything.

Furthermore, are you going to address the rest of my post?

The whole reason I made this thread is because Cantor's plan doesn't make any sense whatsoever. When they say "save" $40 billion over 10 years ($4 billion a year) all that means is students will be paying interest now rather than a couple years down the road.

It's a gimmicky accounting trick. There is no real savings of any sort.

All this is going to do is make it more difficult for college students to accept loans and pay off those loans. It has no positive effect on the deficit whatsoever.

 

[Trajan]

really?

Yeah really, you're going to have to show me where I said I was owed anything.

Furthermore, are you going to address the rest of my post?

The whole reason I made this thread is because Cantor's plan doesn't make any sense whatsoever. When they say "save" $40 billion over 10 years ($4 billion a year) all that means is students will be paying interest now rather than a couple years down the road.

It's a gimmicky accounting trick. There is no real savings of any sort.

All this is going to do is make it more difficult for college students to accept loans and pay off those loans. It has no positive effect on the deficit whatsoever.

I did in my very first response on this thread.

and oh I see, so you're in college but none of this would effect you? You're interest in this is totally pedestrian? Uhm ok.


Hear yea!!!!!

I here-by ask that anyone reading the post I made to Modbert ala sacrifice, insert in place of YOU, THEY as in they or THOSE 'college students' etc. in the post remarked up by Modbert in his retort.

His posts ala shared sacrifice etc. revolves not wit upon or is topical to him/he in any personal means or matter, he is totally outside the topic or subject matter.