Obama's budget is a nervous breakdown on paper

[The T]

EXACTLY what have the (golden goose) job creators actually created in the past ten years.

Please be precise.

EXACTLY.

Never mind. Let me help you out. I'll tell you what the 1% job creators have created in the past ten years -

N-O-T-H-I-N-G.

Disagree?

Then post the links that PROVE I'm wrong.

They won't.

Look at what they are making fun of:

Cleaver says, “This budget is a nervous breakdown on paper. And it’s not just President Obama. I think he's put together a document that addresses education. We need to do it. Community colleges need to be upgraded. We got to have training for real jobs. We've got a lot of jobs that are going unfilled because we don't have the technology in the heads of graduating college students to deal with them."

See? They are making fun of "jobs, education and technology". What can you say?

They who? A Democratic member of the Congressional Black Caucus called the budget a nervous breakdown on paper. How is that Republicans making fun of jobs, education, and technology?

Right. It's not.

 

[editec]

NOW is time to undertake massive infrastructure investments.

Now, while the cost of money is so low.

Investing and augmenting our community colleges and technical schools is an excellent example of the sort of infrastructure investments we ought to be undertaking.

Of course we can't solve this economy, or the decline in the standard of living of most Americans because the GOP likes it this way.

AFter all the mess we're in right now is largely the result of the GOP's stupid economic policies.

To be fair, the Republic-light branch of the DEMS helped them a lot,too.

 

[Claudette]

Now is the time to reform entitlements get rid of tax loopholes and tax cuts.

Entitlments are the elephant in the room and none of the Clowns in Congress want to touch that hot potatoe.

We have 47% of the population right now that don't pay any Fed taxes yet collect a hefty tax return. What happens when that figure reached 50% or better?? The Clowns in Congress have no problem giving away hardearned tax dollars to those that haven't earned it.

Does anyone want to end up like Greece?? Thats where we are headed.

 

[saveliberty]

Greece is a perfect example why you don't cut spending while in recession -- because it ruins the economy and, as result, worsens the deficits.

Actually it (Solyndra) does -- the economy is depressed because of a weak private sector spending, so if the government substitutes some of it, it helps the economy. And I hope you are aware that private investors often do stupid things too.

The only credit rating that matters is the interest rates that US has to pay on borrowed money. And it remains at historic lows.

Yes, I do. The economy is not going to be depressed forever. And it does not need Dot Com, or some other bubble to return to its natural state of full employment. If you think of it, it simply does not make sense that millions of willing and able workers have to sit idle, like they do now. It is a technical problem, which should had been solved immediately after the crisis started. Unfortunately there were not enough political will to do that, but the good news is that the economy comes out the recession on its own, only later.

So the revenues will shoot up on their own and probably soon.

Doing anything that can suppress demand in a weak economy will worsen the depression. But rising the taxes on the rich might not have much effect on demand. Normally they invest most of their income, but we are in a depression precisely because private sector is holding back on investments. So taking those idle money will not be such a bad thing.

But cutting spending is madness for sure. That is what Greece was forced to do in the past couple years, and we all can see that it only made its debt problem worse.

On the other hand, look at Japan -- much bigger debt than in Greece, but they are borrowing at 0% since 80s.

Greece cut spending, because they had such a heavy debt load, no one would lend money, except at 16% or better. That debt came from entitlements and the interest on the same debt. You clearly have no basis for your theory.

Excuse me? Solyndra was near bankrutcy when the federal government "lent" them more money. It is intellectual dishonesty to say private investors would do the same. The only people that benefited for that move was the Obama campaign treasury and the owner. All the employees were unceremoniously dumped post election.

Government tying up capital and creating more debt has lengthened the recession. Artifical market controls allowed and promoted by the government made the recession to begin with.

Japan has a much larger GDP than Greece, not a fair comparision at all. Also, please cite source of 0% borrowing by the Japanese government since 1980.

 

[ilia25]

So you think that the Federal government spending millions on Solyndra was a good idea. Really?

Do you think private investment into Pets.Com or subprime was a good idea? Investments are always a risky business. But my point is that when the economy is falling into recession because private sector holds back on spending and investment, the government has to try and pick up the slack -- even though weak economy depresses the government revenues and increases deficits.

They call counter-cyclical policy for a reason.

I'm curious as to what is going to make revenues "shoot up"?

Millions that are currently unemployed will eventually find jobs and start paying taxes.

If you don't see a Dot Com boom...and I don't think anyone does...then what is it that's going to make that happen?

Again, you don't need some ponzi scheme for the economy to return in its natural state of the full employment.

Our interest rate is only low because so much of the rest of the world is in even worse shape than we are.

Like that is going to change.

For some reason you think because European investors view the US as a safer thing to invest in than Europe that we're in good shape.

It's not just Europe, everyone else in the world knows that parking their dollars in the US debt is safe. And since they don't want to invest in a depressed economy, they have no other choice. The interest rates will stay low until the economy is fully recovered.

As for Greece? They are forced to cut spending because they have an entitlement society.

No -- the are forced to do that because they were not borrowing in their own currency. That is the only thing that differentiate them from Japan, that has much bigger debt.

It isn't something that happened in the last two years...

The last two years prove that cutting spending in a weak economy only worsens the debt problems. That is not a solution.

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say Japan has been borrowing at 0%.

They are borrowing at 0.2% for 4 years and at 1.8% for 20 years:

BTW Japan had its credit rating downgraded back in 2002

 

[Quantum Windbag]

NOW is time to undertake massive infrastructure investments.

Now, while the cost of money is so low.

Investing and augmenting our community colleges and technical schools is an excellent example of the sort of infrastructure investments we ought to be undertaking.

Of course we can't solve this economy, or the decline in the standard of living of most Americans because the GOP likes it this way.

AFter all the mess we're in right now is largely the result of the GOP's stupid economic policies.

To be fair, the Republic-light branch of the DEMS helped them a lot,too.

Community colleges should be paid for by the community, not the federal government. If we reduce federal taxes communities will be have easier access to funds and be able to develop programs that help the community, not ones that help the city 1000 miles away.

 

[Oldstyle]

NOW is time to undertake massive infrastructure investments.

Now, while the cost of money is so low.

Investing and augmenting our community colleges and technical schools is an excellent example of the sort of infrastructure investments we ought to be undertaking.

Of course we can't solve this economy, or the decline in the standard of living of most Americans because the GOP likes it this way.

AFter all the mess we're in right now is largely the result of the GOP's stupid economic policies.

To be fair, the Republic-light branch of the DEMS helped them a lot,too.

So let me get this straight, Ed...the GOP "likes" a decline in the standard of living of most Americans? You base this on what? Because they're asking for some fiscal restraint? Because they want to shrink an out of control Federal Government and return more decision making to people at the State level? Because they're calling for entitlement reform?

Nobody "likes" a decline in the standard of living of their constituents...least of all politicians. It leads to new people getting elected...which is most likely what will happen next November.

 

[saveliberty]

What sort of standard of living will there be for my grandkids? The debt load should crush any opportunity for most of the things we enjoy today.

 

[The T]

What sort of standard of living will there be for my grandkids? The debt load should crush any opportunity for most of the things we enjoy today.

Forget it. They have already been sold into generational slavery by this government decades ago...

 

[bripat9643]

Sort of a dog bites man story: a liberal congressman supports greater countercyclical spending during a recession than does the Democratic president. I guess "nervous breakdown" is a bit attention-getting, though not as much as Cleaver's "Satan sandwich".

When have liberal congressmen ever supported less spending?

 

[ilia25]

He is proposing $47,000,000,000,000 in spending and $2,500,000,000,000 in cuts over the next ten years.

That's because 47 trillions is a very reasonable number -- almost any other advanced country will spend a bigger share of GDP than the US.

His budget will increase the public debt over the next 10 years by $7,900,000,000,000

Almost every budget in US history increased the public debt by X dollars. What makes this one so special?

Keep in mind that the chart I just posted is what Obama is projecting will happen if his predictions are correct. Want to know how good his projections have been in the past?

Yup, Obama tended to be too optimistic about the economy. At least he learned from those mistakes -- we need a budget that stimulates the economy if only because reducing the unemployment is the most effective way of reducing the deficit.

 

[grunt11b]

Video: Paul Ryan Dismantles Obama Budget Gimmicks - Guy Benson

 

[ilia25]

Sort of a dog bites man story: a liberal congressman supports greater countercyclical spending during a recession than does the Democratic president. I guess "nervous breakdown" is a bit attention-getting, though not as much as Cleaver's "Satan sandwich".

When have liberal congressmen ever supported less spending?

Spending in 2010 FY was less than in 2009. I guess quite a few liberal congressmen supported 2010 budget.

 

[grunt11b]

That might have had something to do with the expected shellacking they knew they where gonna take in 2010 as well. Kinda hard to go full steam ahead when you know it can cost you your job.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He is proposing $47,000,000,000,000 in spending and $2,500,000,000,000 in cuts over the next ten years.

That's because 47 trillions is a very reasonable number -- almost any other advanced country will spend a bigger share of GDP than the US.

His budget will increase the public debt over the next 10 years by $7,900,000,000,000

Almost every budget in US history increased the public debt by X dollars. What makes this one so special?

Keep in mind that the chart I just posted is what Obama is projecting will happen if his predictions are correct. Want to know how good his projections have been in the past?

Yup, Obama tended to be too optimistic about the economy. At least he learned from those mistakes -- we need a budget that stimulates the economy if only because reducing the unemployment is the most effective way of reducing the deficit.

That was funny. Guess what the best economist on Obama's team thinks of the budget? He says it is unsustainable in the long run. even if Obama's projections are correct.

By the way, when did Obama learn from his mistakes? When did he even admit he made a mistake?

 

[ilia25]

He is proposing $47,000,000,000,000 in spending and $2,500,000,000,000 in cuts over the next ten years.

That's because 47 trillions is a very reasonable number -- almost any other advanced country will spend a bigger share of GDP than the US.

Almost every budget in US history increased the public debt by X dollars. What makes this one so special?

Keep in mind that the chart I just posted is what Obama is projecting will happen if his predictions are correct. Want to know how good his projections have been in the past?

Yup, Obama tended to be too optimistic about the economy. At least he learned from those mistakes -- we need a budget that stimulates the economy if only because reducing the unemployment is the most effective way of reducing the deficit.

That was funny. Guess what the best economist on Obama's team thinks of the budget? He says it is unsustainable in the long run.

The long run will not happen tomorrow. Those problems will be fixed by making the rich paying more taxes in 2013 and by the health reform, which will ease the pressure on Medicare. We might also need to rise the retirement age for those not doing a physical labor.

By the way, when did Obama learn from his mistakes?

When he realised that his priority should be getting the economy back on track, not the spending cuts.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's because 47 trillions is a very reasonable number -- almost any other advanced country will spend a bigger share of GDP than the US.

Almost every budget in US history increased the public debt by X dollars. What makes this one so special?

Yup, Obama tended to be too optimistic about the economy. At least he learned from those mistakes -- we need a budget that stimulates the economy if only because reducing the unemployment is the most effective way of reducing the deficit.

That was funny. Guess what the best economist on Obama's team thinks of the budget? He says it is unsustainable in the long run.

The long run will not happen tomorrow. Those problems will be fixed by making the rich paying more taxes in 2013 and by the health reform, which will ease the pressure on Medicare. We might also need to rise the retirement age for those not doing a physical labor.

By the way, when did Obama learn from his mistakes?

When he realised that his priority should be getting the economy back on track, not the spending cuts.

Obama's budget assumes those things are going to happen, and is still unsustainable.

What spending cuts? When did Obama ever cut spending?

 

[ilia25]

That was funny. Guess what the best economist on Obama's team thinks of the budget? He says it is unsustainable in the long run.

The long run will not happen tomorrow. Those problems will be fixed by making the rich paying more taxes in 2013 and by the health reform, which will ease the pressure on Medicare. We might also need to rise the retirement age for those not doing a physical labor.

By the way, when did Obama learn from his mistakes?

When he realised that his priority should be getting the economy back on track, not the spending cuts.

Obama's budget assumes those things are going to happen, and is still unsustainable.

Unsustainable when, in 30 years? I don't think it's time to worry about that.

What spending cuts? When did Obama ever cut spending?

Obama offered Republicans $2 (or $3) of cuts for each dollar of tax increase. Thank God they were stupid enough to refuse that offer.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The long run will not happen tomorrow. Those problems will be fixed by making the rich paying more taxes in 2013 and by the health reform, which will ease the pressure on Medicare. We might also need to rise the retirement age for those not doing a physical labor.

When he realised that his priority should be getting the economy back on track, not the spending cuts.

Obama's budget assumes those things are going to happen, and is still unsustainable.

Unsustainable when, in 30 years? I don't think it's time to worry about that.

What spending cuts? When did Obama ever cut spending?

Obama offered Republicans $2 of cuts for each dollar of tax increase. Thank God they were stupid enough to refuse that offer.

You don't think it is time to worry about that? You would rather wait until it is to late to do anything and start worrying about things then? Do you think it will magically fix itself if we ignore it?

As for the bullshit spending cut for tax increase, that is bullshit.

 

[ilia25]

Obama's budget assumes those things are going to happen, and is still unsustainable.

Unsustainable when, in 30 years? I don't think it's time to worry about that.

What spending cuts? When did Obama ever cut spending?

Obama offered Republicans $2 of cuts for each dollar of tax increase. Thank God they were stupid enough to refuse that offer.

You don't think it is time to worry about that? You would rather wait until it is to late to do anything and start worrying about things then? Do you think it will magically fix itself if we ignore it?

You don't know what might happen in 30 years, so yes, it might fix itself. In any case, we should at least wait until the economy is back on track.

As for the bullshit spending cut for tax increase, that is bullshit.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...cuts/2011/07/06/gIQA2sFO1H_story.html?hpid=z1