CBO Score: Senate Plan Cuts Deficits by $2.2 Trillion Over the Next Ten Years
ABC News' Sunlen Miller (@sunlenmiller) reports:
One day after the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office scored the Boehner plan finding it short on cuts, the CBO this morning released a more favorable score for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s debt ceiling plan.
CBO, the nonpartisan budget accounting arm of Congress, estimates that Reid's legislation would reduce budget deficits by about $2.2 trillion over the next ten years. The score could perhaps breathe new momentum into to the Senate plan. Reid’s plan would raise the debt ceiling by $2. 7 trillion – past the next presidential election and into 2013. The competing proposal from Boehner is a two-step plan that would require another debt ceiling vote in about six months.
But don't look for Republicans to flock to Reid's proposal. They have complained that nearly half the cuts in Reid's proposal – $1 trillion – comes from “winding down” of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Republicans have said this is a disingenuous way of counting money that would not have been spent anyway since the wars are already winding down.
Discretionary spending cuts in Reid's proposal would result in $840 billion in lower authorized spending, the CBO report said this morning and $750 billion in actual lower outlays in the next ten years.
Speaker of the House Boehner’s plan, scored yesterday by the CBO found $850 in savings – less than the Speaker had anticipated. Boehner has delayed a House vote originally scheduled for a vote today in order to find more savings, and rally more votes in the House for the plan.
The Senate plan is not scheduled for a vote yet.
Email
Rick Santorum Defends Earmarks
Ron Paul Ad's Call Santorum a 'Fake'
HOLD FIRM, REPUBLICANS! You will NEVER see the decrease in spending from the “winding down of the wars.” This is not written in stone and the Democrats & Obama will flip-flop on this. Obama has lied and deceived MANY times during the debt crisis…hold them to the fire. Obama just wants this discussion to go past the election, like he would be re-elected anyway. Obama is a loser. Just this morning, a Democratic Congressman was arrested outside the White House because Obama has failed on immigration. Obama is losing the Independent vote, the hispanic, and now the African-American vote is nose-diving. This country will NOT get back on track until Barack HUSSEIN Obama is voted OUT of office!
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 10:57 am 10:57 am
Sorry Harry, S&P said cuts need to be at least $4T to prevent downgrade. Google on your own.
Posted by: deanbob | July 27, 2011, 11:12 am 11:12 am
the GOP has no plan…they are the ones ruining this country. I will NEVER VOTE FOR ANY OF THEM. They have wanted this president out from day one. All lies and rumors. John B. has no plan…now his plan is no good and they are scrambling to make another one? DISGUSTING.
Posted by: Barb | July 27, 2011, 11:13 am 11:13 am
Students, have you looked at the interest rate on your student loans? There are reports that some (interest rates) have doubled since the Federal govt took control of them (last year).
Posted by: deanbob | July 27, 2011, 11:15 am 11:15 am
Art: David seems to be one of those that have been slamming this president since day one. It’s ridiculous. He’s doing a good job considering all the messes he has. The GOP has been NO NO NO from day one. We can see that from John B.’s so called plan. I listed to both sides the other night and John B. said the president was given a blank check? What kind of nonsense is that? And they want a six month plan to be rehased all over again. Politics and elections not the well being of the country. Party of NO and the RICH.
Posted by: Barb | July 27, 2011, 11:17 am 11:17 am
David, Why should we leave the tax loopholes fo Goldman-Sachs? Why shouldn’t the Bin-Laden Family pay normal tax rates after $250,000 of earnings?
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 11:25 am 11:25 am
barb
do you know what you are talking about, you say GOP has no plan but his plan is no good. WTH
Posted by: 4betterdays | July 27, 2011, 11:28 am 11:28 am
The report doesn’t mention the cuts don’t start until years later, his cuts are not real cuts but savings from getting out of the wars. It is really all smoke and mirrors but I new the media would try to make it sound good. Plus it gets the President thru the Nov. election, he can’t be bothered spending time on this nations business, he is too busy campaigning and fundraising.
Posted by: Freedom | July 27, 2011, 11:29 am 11:29 am
@Barb, @Art Actually, I’m an Independent that DID vote for Obama in 2008. The GOP has put forth four different plans…Obama has already stated that he will VETO any plan the Republicans put forth. Democrats have not put forth a plan in over 800 days, with the exception of Reid’s on yesterday. So, you have a POTUS that explicitly states he will veto ANY plan from the GOP, but yet, goes on national television and spouts bi-partisanship. Obama is an utter failure…..”empty suit, no substance.” YES, I’m upset! I voted for Obama and it has been NOTHING but LIES from day one…LOOK at all the campaign promises he’s broken. Even though I don’t agree with the GOP on all fronts, I do see them making an effort. Obama is doing nothing but playing to his base. He’s a very sad person…myself and millions of other Independents will NOT be voting for Obama next year..thats a promise.
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 11:30 am 11:30 am
Why SHOULD the cuts start now? America is hurting from this crisis. We SHOULD get out of those Wars, and the money SHOULD go toward the debt.
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 11:34 am 11:34 am
Call me names if you like: Since Obama has been POTUS, the defict has increased by 35%…thats MORE than the combined TOTAL of ALL Presidents before him. Since Obama has given waivers to over 1400 companies (mostly union companies), why not put ObamaCare on the chopping block instead of Medicare/Medicaid. If Obama has a plan, why doesnt he put it in writing. You see the GOP presenting plan after plan…Obama has already promised, no matter what plan the GOP puts through Congress, he will veto it. Sometimes, I think Obama wants the country to fail…..Obama is a weakling….he’s losing support left and right and is only concerned about re-election….he thinks its all about him. This is ridiculous.
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 11:35 am 11:35 am
@Art…..I didnt deny I highlighted ‘hussein”. Yes, I did that purposefully, because Obama is NOT acting in the best interest of ur country. Believe what you want about my party preference, thats not important. As you are noticing, many Americans, of ALL parties are tired of Washington. When you have the POTUS using primetime television to come out without a plan, attacking the other side, this is not problem solving, then also saying he will veto ANY plan coming from the Republicans. He also is moving the goalposts, wants to cut social security, medicare, entitlements, etc…but nothing about ObamaCare after giving over 1400 waivers. Its evident you are a very left Liberal…I respect your affiliation..however, I feel a lot more Americans are more in line with my thinking than yours.
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 11:42 am 11:42 am
4betterdays: John B. has no plan because the so called plan he had was not a plan at all…it did not cut the deficit enough. he just quickly put something together!.it was all over the news this morning.
David: I disagree. I think more Americans are fed up with the GOP. We will see what happens when elections roll around.
Posted by: Barb | July 27, 2011, 11:47 am 11:47 am
I also think it is childish to keep saying Pres. Obama wants this country to fail, he wants a default. Just think about it…do you think ANY president would want that? It would mean HE failed. very immature. parrot like …GOP as usual.
Posted by: Barb | July 27, 2011, 11:49 am 11:49 am
@Barb: Obama has already failed. Even the liberals are coming out saying his is not a leader in this debacle. Bernie Sanders, who caucuses w/Democrats is wanting a Democrat to challenge Obama next year in a primary. A Democrat Congressman was arrested yesterday at the WH protesting Obama’s stanc on immigration. Obama’s party is turning against him…call it what you want, spin it any way you want….the Democrats are imploding and Obama is a complete and total failure.
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 11:52 am 11:52 am
What would Obama’s middle name have to do with POLITICAL POLICY?
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 11:53 am 11:53 am
Dave: you have your opinion and I have mine…but from day one the GOP has been blasting this president. I’m so sick of all the back and forth and name calling from some of the other posters. It’s so silly…people believe rumors and lies and both sides do have a lot of fault, but the GOP/Tea Party are the worst. Let’s see what actually happens on election day.
Posted by: Barb | July 27, 2011, 11:54 am 11:54 am
Where is the leadership from the Republican Presidential Hopefuls like Romnut and GinGut, who should thunderously denounce tea party insanity. No REAL Leadership from Romnut or GinGut as usual.
Posted by: swl2010 | July 27, 2011, 11:55 am 11:55 am
MITT ROMONEY IS A LOSER WITH NO SPINE, HE DODGES THE DEBT DEBATE, TOO CHICKEN
Posted by: swl2010 | July 27, 2011, 11:56 am 11:56 am
When you have a House of Representatives protecting tax loopholes for Goldman-Sachs, tax breaks for the very wealthy, liked the Bin-Laden Family, the remainder of us tend to get upset. Do you know who is financing that shortcoming? US.
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 11:57 am 11:57 am
Definition of a Tea Partier- GOP that is trying to distance themselves from Bush/GOP policies, while doing everything to maintain them.
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 11:59 am 11:59 am
@Barb: I respect your position and like you , I’m tired of hearing about this, the back and forth. I feel both parties are to blame and Obama as well. Congress needs to get out of DC to see how hard it is to make ends meet for everyday Americans. I feel the Tea Party has some radical stances, but, as an Independent, I have to suppor the GOP on this…I see them trying, time and again, against a POTUS who has promised to shoot down any plan they offer. Do you agree that obama should have taken that stance? “Hussein” is highlighted becaus Obama is not acting like an American now, he’s acting like some third world leader.
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 12:00 pm 12:00 pm
I guess in the repubs thinking, taking the costs of the wars out of the budget would be disingenuous, since they never included the cost of the wars in the budget. They just added them as supplemental spending every time the money ran out.
The sad part of all this is the fact that a default by the US is a win for AlQaeda. They knew they could not destroy America’s military might. But, following the collapse of the USSR. They knew that drawing us into multiple wars that we would fund by borrowing money would ultimately destroy us financially. Why else do you think they planned an attack on us when we had a weak minded cowboy in charge. Because they knew we would dive in with both feet without understanding to consequences. Osama may be gone but he still may be winning the battle.
Posted by: poolezdz | July 27, 2011, 12:02 pm 12:02 pm
We overspend $1.4 trillion a year. The Senate wants to save $2.2 trillion over the next ten years. This means at the end of ten years we are $11.8 trillion deeper in debt. How is this a solution to the problem? This isn’t even a good smoke and mirrors play. CUT the blasted spending to revenue levels. Stop increasing the debt.
Posted by: Give me a Break | July 27, 2011, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
David im sure if one of those plans would just put a little effort on the backs of the rich and not all on the backs of seniors and average americans obama would gladly sign it.dont be just another dead set republican look at real life
Posted by: Tim | July 27, 2011, 12:05 pm 12:05 pm
It is to laugh when one reads ABC’s “journalism.” Does Reid’s plan cut deficits as the story alleges or does it cut the debt? $2.2 trillion over 10 years is $220 billion a year. We currently play $480 billion in interest alone. It should also be noted that the CBO does not validate the claims, only the math used in the assumptions with the understanding that the CBO will not question the assumptions. So “if” everything falls in place according to Reid’s assumptions (and that includes downsizing our two legal wars without any mention of the one in Libya that we are waging illegally) then we might be able to cut the interest payments in half. We won’t eliminate debt until we eliminate all deficit spending.
Posted by: wantingbalance | July 27, 2011, 12:05 pm 12:05 pm
Which party is the friend of big business??? — Look what Obama’s friend, Jeff Immelt is doing!! — The White House advisor on “JOBS” is arranging for General Electric Co.’s health care unit, the world’s biggest maker of medical imaging machines, is moving the headquarters of its 115-year-old X-ray business to Beijing. “A handful’’ of top managers will move to the Chinese capital and there won’t be any job cuts, said Anne LeGrand, general manager of X-ray for GE Healthcare. The headquarters will move from Wisconsin amid a broader plan to invest about $2 billion across China, including opening six “customer innovation’’ and development centers.
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 12:07 pm 12:07 pm
We don’t need name calling and it shouldn’t matter what party you support, we need to get this fixed!!! The only logical fix is to cut spending and increase revenues. You have to have both for there to be any reduction in the deficit. We need to get our leaders back to a middle road where things actually get accomplished!!!
Posted by: Katie | July 27, 2011, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm
David, why can’t we say CORRECTLY, every word you just used, except swap the Obama references, and insert “GOP”, then, visa-versa?
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm
The only reason Bohner is changing his plan is because its including the bogus cuts for ending the war that Reid put into his plan. Therefore Boehners plan includes more cuts than Reids. Apparently most of you were asleep months ago when our government was shutting down under Harry Reid’s and the Obama administrations stewardship. It was Bohner who kept the government open and soldiers and federal employees getting their paycheck – not the democrats!
Posted by: Paulie | July 27, 2011, 12:10 pm 12:10 pm
The only reason Bohner is changing his plan is because its including the bogus cuts for ending the war that Reid put into his plan. Therefore Boehners plan includes more cuts than Reids. Apparently most of you were asleep months ago when our government was shutting down under Harry Reid’s and the Obama administrations stewardship. It was Bohner who kept the government open and soldiers and federal employees getting their paycheck – not the democrats!
Posted by: Paulie | July 27, 2011, 12:10 pm 12:10 pm
@Art…you are only attacking me….I will not acknowledge you. You are giving the Democrats a bad name with your posts. I feel sorry for you.
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm
Senate… you get $1Trillion of your “cuts” by counting less war costs??? — “SPENDING CUTS”!??!?!? — So if you did NOTHING… wouldn’t those costs be figured into future budgets anyway??
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 12:12 pm 12:12 pm
loyaloppo- So, you want to go on the record as, “In Favor Of, Keeping tax loopholes for the Chinese”?
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm
I haven’t paid this much attention because I know that they are going to do what THEY want. My question is, why don’t they cut their own salaries? I doubt very seriously that all the people in Washington are actually doing what they were elected to do, and that is be the voice of the people, not themselves. They have their own agendas and plans and that’s what they’re going for. They need to be the ones cut. Imagine all the money that could be saved if they weren’t paid so much. Don’t cut Social Security to the people that earned it and depend on it. And do not cut the military who are defending our freedom to be a free country and allow us to vote. Their dedication give us the right to vote which puts our country leaders in their positions. If our country’s leaders want to keep their jobs, allow our warriors to continue to defend our freedom.
Posted by: abc123 | July 27, 2011, 12:15 pm 12:15 pm
David the president is trying to get a plan not cutting social security.medicare,the republicans are wanting to cut those.They may have to be cut some but the rich needs to pay a little more taxes
Posted by: Tim | July 27, 2011, 12:16 pm 12:16 pm
LOOK AT THESE POSTS!!! I’M SADDENED! AMERICANS ATTACKING EACH OTHER, CALLING EACH OTHER NAMES! THIS IS A DISGRACE! WE ARE THE “UNITED” STATES OF AMERICA….THERE IS BLAME ON ALL THREE FACTIONS…DEMOCRATS…REPUBLICANS…AND PRESIDENT OBAMA….I AM 69 YEARS OLD AND AM SICKENED BY WHAT I AM SEEING HAPPENING TO THIS GREAT COUNTRY…A COUNTRY THAT MY HUSBAND FOUGHT AND DIED FOR! ENOUGH OF THIS….WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER…FORGET ALL THE ATTACKS!
JEAN BOURGEOIS
Posted by: Jean | July 27, 2011, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm
David, Good Riddance. Change your posting name and come back soon.
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm
David, the post”Definition of a Tea Partier- GOP that is trying to distance themselves from Bush/GOP policies, while doing everything to maintain them.” was NOT aimed at you.
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 12:19 pm 12:19 pm
ART —— Don’t you see the humor? — The WH advisor on “JOBS” moving a 115 year old co to China?? —— So is this the official advice he gives Obama?? — Is this now “official policy”??? —- The Dem party that “rants” constantly that the GOP is all about “corporate America”??…. irony abounds!!
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 12:20 pm 12:20 pm
@Tim I have not seen any plan where the GOP wants to cut social security or medicare. Do you have a link you can share?
Posted by: David From Texas | July 27, 2011, 12:20 pm 12:20 pm
Jean, You blatantly forgot Tea Partiers.
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 12:21 pm 12:21 pm
TIM — You said “the rich needs to pay a little more taxes” — I think the progressives have achieved major success in “socking it to the rich” over the last 30 years!! — In 1980, when the top income tax rate was 70%, the richest 1% paid only 19% of all income taxes… In 1990, the richest one percent paid 25% of all income taxes… in 2005 it was 39%… In 2010 the CBO said they paid 40% of all income taxes!!!
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm
Loyal, Yes, the hypocrisy is everywhere, but, when I see your postings, you seem to ONLY criticize one side. What’s wrong with helping the economy by closing loopholes used by OPEC, China, and India? Cutting spending is important, but, if we can’t afford “tax breaks” for the very wealthy, then, we should get rid of them and put that money toward our goal.
Posted by: Art | July 27, 2011, 12:27 pm 12:27 pm
Give me a Break | Jul 27, 2011 12:03:07 PM posted: “We overspend $1.4 trillion a year. The Senate wants to save $2.2 trillion over the next ten years. This means at the end of ten years we are $11.8 trillion deeper in debt. How is this a solution to the problem?”
It’s not. See, the reason we got here is because of a combination of over spending AND lost tax income. Our nation will also need to raise taxes.
But since most neo-Libertarian Republicans pledged allegiance to Grover Norquist’s lobbying outfit to never raise taxes, that’s the only card they can play. Cut cut cut.
Meanwhile, tax.com estimates our nation could pay down $1 TRILLION every single year by eliminating certain tax loopholes – and we could even reduce the corporate tax rate while we are at it. Seems like a sensible solution to a majority of us. Just not the neo-Libertarian Republicans.
Posted by: green.goddess | July 27, 2011, 12:29 pm 12:29 pm
On Feb. 15, 2011, Boehner told reporters that if some (federal) jobs were lost as a result of the Republicans proposed spending cuts, “so be it.” How many jobs you ask? According to Scott Lilly, a federal budget expert at the Center for American Progress, Boehner’s proposed spending cuts could kill almost 1 million jobs. He calculated that the cuts – a net of $59 billion in the last half of fiscal 2011 – would lead to the loss of 650,000 government jobs, and the indirect loss of 325,000 more jobs since fewer government workers would buy things. That’s nearly 1 million jobs – maybe enough to put the economy back into recession. (Who’s trying to wreck the nation?) With the additional JOB KILLING cuts Boehner wants now, how many more middle class workers will be thrown into the streets? So Be It indeed.
Posted by: berndtc | July 27, 2011, 12:34 pm 12:34 pm
The real news today is from CBS NEWS reporting on Operation Fast & Furious. They have linked not only AG Holder, but 0bama as well, with knowledge (and possibly authorizing) of this idiotic and murderous operation. People have died from this ridiculous attempt by the libs to force gun control in the US. It backfired…just like everything else this administration has done.
Posted by: vod-k-nockers | July 27, 2011, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
TheLoyalOpposition | Jul 27, 2011 12:25:10 PM posteed: “In 2010 the CBO said they paid 40% of all income taxes!!!”
Why are you shocked at the CBO’s numbers when a tiny percentage of the wealthiest Americans have been accumulating MOST of the income?
Approximately 2.9 Milllion “high net worth individuals” (HNWI) live in the US. That’s 1% of us. These are citizens who accumulate at least $1 Million of “invest-able assets” in addition to the value of their homes, toys, jets, jewelry, and tangible goods.
HNWI’s “investible assets” totaled $12.09 TRILLION. These are the people who most benefited from a DECADE of Bush era tax advantages on income from Capital Gains.
The entire bottom HALF of America’s population accumulates only 2.5% of the nation’s income – these people are poor, unemployed, old, handicapped, or little kids on welfare – NO WONDER they don’t pay the same taxes as HNWI ! They don’t have JOBS, much less stock investments.
Right now, the bottom half cannot afford to pick up the slack when food stamps or heating assistance programs are cut, just so our nation can continue Bush era tax cuts for the uber-wealthy. The rich did just fine under Clinton era tax levels, and it won’t kill these people them to pitch in again at a higher level until we rebuild jobs.
Posted by: green.goddess | July 27, 2011, 12:52 pm 12:52 pm
Freedom | Jul 27, 2011 11:29:28 AM
…”The report doesn’t mention the cuts don’t start until years later, his cuts are not real cuts but savings from getting out of the wars.”….And nothiong binds a subsequent Congress to the current commitments (other than specific laws passed.)
Posted by: deanbob | July 27, 2011, 2:20 pm 2:20 pm
DEANBOB Posted this: “Sorry Harry, S&P said cuts need to be at least $4T to prevent downgrade. Google on your own.”
What needs to be explained to the American Public is how rigged the Congress Budget process has become. Its called Baseline budgeting. Here is how the scam works.
Say there is an Agency with a 100 Billion dollar budget. Lets assume Congress has allowed this Agency to have say a 10% annual increase in the budget.
If we do not cut their budget ONE dollar but only keep them steady what the Dems will do is to run to the Liberal Media and scream that over the next ten years Conservatives have called for “slashing” the budget of the agency by 100 Billion. I know that with a 10% increase the actual amount will be slightly higher from the 10% each year starts to multiply. But the Idea is that Congress AUTOMATICALLY assumes a budget goes up. If you hold it to the same you have “taken” from them…. Any wonder we are broke??
WE need to call ALL The Congress and tell them to do a freeze to the Budget and ignore baseline budgeting. Anything else keeps us spending money that we DO NOT HAVE……….. If we do not stop raising these budgets how are we EVER going to get to a balanced budget? And we need a SURPLUS to pay down the 16.5 Trillion we will owe at the end of 2012.
That means that Obama has added 6 trillion in NEW debt in 4 years. Add to that the 2.4 Trillion that ObamaCare will add to our deficit according to the CBO. So Obama has added 8.4 Trillion dollars to your kids credit card. Interest on that amount at just 5% is some 420 Billion dollars EVERY year. That is what FOUR times what the wars are costing us yearly. Thanks for nothing Mr. Socialist… GOOD Bye and GOOD Riddance.
Posted by: RichardBall1 | July 27, 2011, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm
Some here would have you believe that President Obama caused all of our problems. The fact is that Pres. WJ Clinton left GW Bush 230 billion dollar surplus, and W left president Obama a 12.86 trillion dollar deficit (after the 2009 budget — W’s last):
Some would say that fed spending is out of control (not so much):
The ideologues on the right don’t want you to see this chart:
The fact is that the tax burden is lower now than at any point in the modern era, and corporations are making record profits at the same time that they move jobs overseas and capture capitol from the working class and move it upward:
The Republicans have their talking points, but President Obama and the Congressional Democrats have the facts and the history of Republican misrule to prove it.
Posted by: common sense | July 27, 2011, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm
People who make a point of poating “Barrack Hussein Obama” are making the point that they feel the prsident is “one of them” and not one of us, you know, the real Americans. SOmeone with a funny foreign sounding name isn’t a real American. Isn’t that right?
Well, that’s just nonsense and right wing diatribe. We’re in debt because of the last Republican president’s fiscal policies and those two unwinable wars. The military spending has become a huge part of why our debt is huge and it does need to be brought under control and casting aspersions on someone’s heritage is not going to change that.
Posted by: EarlGrayHot | July 27, 2011, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
green.goddess | Jul 27, 2011 12:29:27 PM
…”the reason we got here is because of a combination of over spending AND lost tax income.”….What lost tax income. In 2005 and 2006, we took in RECORD amounts of tax revenue and would have boken the record again in 2007 had it not been for the morket drop starting in Oct 2007. Just more proof that when you lower the tax rate (within reason), the tax revenues increase. This is similar to gasoline prices in that the higher gas prices go, the less people drive.
Posted by: deanbob | July 27, 2011, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
SWL2010 posted this Liberal rant: “Where is the leadership from the Republican Presidential Hopefuls like Romnut and GinGut, who should thunderously denounce tea party insanity. No REAL Leadership from Romnut or GinGut as usual.”/////
Hey SWL!! One question. WHERE is Obama’s written plan???? Where is the DEM controlled Senate’s Budget that was due over 2 years ago BY LAW? Answer… It does not EXIST. Obama can say anything since he has not written down a plan. If he did the CBO could score it and show him to be the LIAR that he is known to be.
Posted by: RichardBall1 | July 27, 2011, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
greengoddess —- You said “a tiny percentage of the wealthiest Americans have been accumulating MOST of the income” —– poppycock… where did you get “MOST” from??? —- It is a sad fact that those in poverty are affected the most in a recession… but it happens every recession!! — Please tell me WHEN there hasn’t been a “wealthy class” with the most “economic power” in our country or any country…. and please tell me statistically how it is different today measured against other times of major recession!!
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 2:43 pm 2:43 pm
Art —– I see your point… from your perspective you see not enough money to pay our bills… which could be solved by increasing revenu OR cutting spending! — Here is WHY I believe the only answer is spending cuts!!
1) Even after the Bush tax cuts, revenue increased 5 straight years until the recession, so “revenue” was not the big problem.
2) Over the last 10 years, spending has increased exponentially while revenue increased linearly, so even though revenue did increase, congress spent even more!
3) Economic rule #1 is not to increase taxes, stifling the ability of small businesses to grow, and small businesses create the most new jobs! 75% of those making over $250,000 are small business owners who create 80% of the jobs in America! — These people usually file a 1040 with a Schedule C for their business profit or loss!!
4) Were police and firefighter services horrible, food poisoned, water unclean, people at the brink of starvation in 2007? NO! So why has spending increased 24% in the last three years… where has it gone… Failed stimulus?? Maybe we don’t need it!!!
5) If we FIX Obama’s failed business policy we won’t need new taxes!! — “small business” is still hunkering down waiting for some future CERTAINTY before expending capital (ie: hiring, capital development, R&D). — “Change” brought out in the last two years has business paralyzed to act!! —— 1) higher expenses for Obamacare, 2) higher costs for financial reform (what a joke) mandates, 3) potential for increased taxes because that is ALL Obama can talk about!!!! —— Obama knows his “policies” are the impediment to small business and ignores it… FIX THIS and we won’t need more taxes… businesses and employed people will increase revenue!!
6) As a smart man said… “we don’t need higher taxes, we need MORE TAXPAYERS (see #5)!!!
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 3:03 pm 3:03 pm
Posted by: deanbob | Jul 27, 2011 2:36:42 PM posted: “What lost tax income. In 2005 and 2006, we took in RECORD amounts of tax revenue and would have broken the record again in 2007 had it not been for the market drop starting in Oct 2007.”
Unfortunately, the Bush era housing bubble tax revenues were NEVER enough to cover the TRILLIONS in debt borrowed at the same time.
Today that combination of missing taxes + borrowing for two pre-emptive wars are the top 2 contributors to our national debt.
WORSE, instead of paying for government war spending with higher tax revenues, the national debt has accumulated INTEREST on those Trillions we borrowed.
And today the debt also added other source of “lost tax income” – the millions of unemployed people who no longer contributed taxes after our nation fell into the Recession in 2007.
Posted by: green.goddess | July 27, 2011, 4:31 pm 4:31 pm
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | Jul 27, 2011 2:43:29 PM posted: “You said a tiny percentage of the wealthiest Americans have been accumulating MOST of the income – where did you get “MOST” from?… Please tell me WHEN there hasn’t been a “wealthy class” with the most “economic power” in our country or any country?”
Looking back at 1915 – the Rockefellers and Carnegies gilded age- the richest 1% of Americans earned about 18% of all income. TODAY, the top 1% account for 24% of all income.
But NO, it hasn’t always been this unequal. Income distribution was fairly stable through the postwar economic boom of the 1950s and 1960s. Economic historians Claudia Goldin and Robert Margo call this era the ‘Great Compression’.
Just about every socio-economic indicator – including the US Census – shows that the distribution of income in the United States has grown increasingly unequal. In 2010, the top 20% of Americans earned 49.4% of the nation’s income, compared with the 3.4% earned by the roughly 15% of the population living below the poverty line.
Posted by: green.goddess | July 27, 2011, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm
greengoddess — So if the income earned by the top 5% or earners is 19% or 24% of all total income…. what is that to you?? — Are you jeolous?? — Where should the figure be?? — Are you going to tax them until they don’t want to live here anymore?? — If they don’t pay more are you going to get out the gillotines?? –What happens when you run out of OTHER PEOPLES MONEY??? —– This is all progressive “class warfare” —- always appeal to the poor’s basic envy… but never really help them!!
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 5:04 pm 5:04 pm
POSTED BY: THELOYALOPPOSITION | JUL 27, 2011 5:04:59 PM posted: So if the income earned by the top 5% or earners is 19% or 24% of all total income…. what is that to you?? — Are you jeolous?? — Where should the figure be?? — Are you going to tax them until they don’t want to live here anymore?? — If they don’t pay more are you going to get out the gillotines?? –What happens when you run out of OTHER PEOPLES MONEY???”
*Sigh* google the Historical Highest Marginal Income Tax Rates. We are at the lowest rate in decades.
Where did you get this crazy idea that a Manhattan hedge fund manager who earns multi-millions every year will denounce his citizenship and flee to live in another country because our nation asks him to pay a higher tax rate? Did high earners leave when Bill Clinton raised taxes to 39.6%? NO.
Progressives aren’t “jealous”, nor do they want to bring out guillotines – so stop the hysteria talk. What we want is a sustainable tax rate that prevents extreme cuts to the most vulnerable.
None of us enjoy paying taxes or government spending on wasteful projects. But the need for a long term solution to this budget fiasco is obvious. We MUST raise taxes, particularly for the ultra-rich who can clearly afford them.
Any person or party making a proposal that does not recognize this obvious fact should be shown the door in the next election. Our national security and our country’s future in a global market are FAR more important than tea soaked hysteria over RETURNING to higher tax rates.
Posted by: green.goddess | July 27, 2011, 7:33 pm 7:33 pm
Common Sense (What irony) posted this Liberal Spin: “Some here would have you believe that President Obama caused all of our problems. The fact is that Clinton left Bush 230 billion dollar surplus, and W left president Obama a 12.86 trillion dollar deficit (after the 2009 budget — W’s last):
Some would say that fed spending is out of control (not so much):
The ideologues on the right don’t want you to see this chart:
The fact is that the tax burden is lower now than at any point in the modern era, and corporations are making record profits at the same time that they move jobs overseas and capture capitol from the working class and move it upward:
The Republicans have their talking points, but President Obama and the Congressional Democrats have the facts and the history of Republican misrule to prove it.
////////HEY Common…. Its amazing that you got EVERY point WRONG..
A. The US Treasury says that Clinton NEVER had a Surplus.
B. While the deficit did get smaller after 1995 while Clinton was Pres that is a coincident. Starting Jan 2005 Conservatives took the House and started the Contract With America. This called for NUMEROUS changes to government and taxation. THOSE changes are what caused the improvement in our financial situation. Clinton fought it EVERY step of the way. The Government was even shut down before Clinton finally caved in and agreed to common sense. What hubris for Liberals to post EVERY day that Clinton was a savior of our economy. Clinton and the Dems WERE the problem. Conservatives and limited government was the solution.
C. How could Bush leave a 12 trillion dollar deficit? The entire national debt at the end of his term was just some 10 trillion? AMAZING how brazenly you Liberals LIE.
D. Finally no one said Obama caused “ALL our problems”. Nice try at a straw man argument. What Obama and the Dems have caused is the following. 5 Trillion in new debt so far, Massive unemployment from his Socialist policies, deflated housing from Liberals messing with the housing market, Huge devaluation in the dollar from HIS reckless spending for quantitative easing parts 1 and 2, A big run up in Commodity prices like oil partly due to the devalued dollar and also due to his ILLEGAL drilling ban in the Gulf of Mexico (TWO Federal Judges have said so), loss of over 250,000 jobs just in the Gulf area due to his ILLEGAL drilling ban in the Gulf, ObamaCare and its associated pack of lies along with the 2.4 trillion in added costs to make Socialized medicine a reality here for the Socialist In Chief, Operation Fast and Furious which resulted in the murder of an American Border Patrol Agent to satisfy Obama’s anti-gun fetish, (by the way when do we start the trial for “high Crimes and misdemeanors?”)
So lets review. Bush left and had around 10.8 trillion in debt. Obama has us now at 15 Trillion. He wants another 2.5 trillion or so in new debt just to get us through the end of next year. Add the TRUE cost per the CBO on ObamaCare and we need to borrow ANOTHER 2.4 trillion. That means in just 4 years OBAMA has added 10 trillion dollars to the national debt. JUST the interest on the curse known to us as Obama’s Regime will run some 500 Billion per year. EVERY YEAR. Now that is what Liberalism has done.
Posted by: RichardBall1 | July 27, 2011, 9:57 pm 9:57 pm
Green Goddess posted this spin: ” Progressives aren’t “jealous”, nor do they want to bring out guillotines – so stop the hysteria talk. What we want is a sustainable tax rate that prevents extreme cuts to the most vulnerable.”///////
Well Green here are the facts. There is not enough money out there to tax to stop some reform of entitlements. According to the IRS the NET worth of ALL American Billionaires is some 1.2 Trillion dollars. Suppose you Progressives created a law that took EVERY penny that they had. It would not even cover this years deficit. Obama would still have 450 Billion dollars in spending that we do not have the money for. And remember we could only do it ONCE since you took ALL their money.
So this is spending that is unsustainable and MUST be cut. The only alternative is a descent into Greece like default except there is no one big enough to bail US out. Welcome to Third World status. Even with John Boehner’s Plan we still add some 7 Trillion in new debt in the next decade. The only thing that saves America as we know it is to CUT spending NOW, Cap future spending and have a Balanced Budget Amendment. Otherwise I can assure you that there will be a rush for the lifeboats just like on the Titanic and those with wealth will leave America LONG before the ship goes down.
Posted by: RichardBall1 | July 27, 2011, 10:07 pm 10:07 pm
greengoddess — and on top of Richards post….. you have to realize that the tax rate is a “starting number”… then you have deductions, etc! — So a more accurate picture of what is happening… is the % of total taxes being paid by the top 5%! — What does it matter what the tax rate is (lowest in decades!) if the true % is much higher?? — Remember… In 1980, when the top income tax rate was 70%, the richest 1% paid only 19% of all income taxes… In 1990, the richest one percent paid 25% of all income taxes… in 2005 it was 39%… In 2010 the CBO said they paid 40% of all income taxes!!! —– So you progressives have gotten what you wanted for the last 30 years!!!
Posted by: TheLoyalOpposition | July 27, 2011, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Both parties are attempting to push their policies at the expense and blame of the other parties ideologies. DEMs want social entitlements and GOPs want business incentives. Sorry – but the TEA PARTY has the right idea, force a balanced budget – and push the money and the power back down to the states and the people.
Posted by: Rich | July 28, 2011, 11:41 am 11:41 am