Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where in this "compromise" are the spending cuts? If you find them please let me know and I will endorse it. All I can see is this bill says borrow $900bn more not borrow less, or borrow none.
It would not be borrowing if the leaders of the Govt actually decided not to spend eyond what their revenue is.....
The lost revenue is not the cost, the borrowing that results from the lost revenue w/o cutting spending is where the cost is. Please read my posts before responding to them.
It is unfortunate that Obama has not realized that the Republican way of adding trillions to the national debt is a horrible idea.
So..the government was forced to spend money they don't have because of the tax cuts ten years ago?
Cut spending then. As many like to say - we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
Looks like some of O's colleagues aren't too happy with him...
Quote:
The frustration with President Barack Obama over his tax cut compromise was palpable and even profane at Thursday’s House Democratic Caucus meeting.
One unidentified lawmaker went so far as to mutter “f--- the president” while Rep. Shelley Berkley was defending the package the president negotiated with Republicans. Berkley confirmed the incident, although she declined to name the specific lawmaker.
“It wasn’t loud,” the Nevada Democrat said. “It was just expressing frustration from a very frustrated Member.”
AS you see you supply your children who cannot get work to join the army.The rich supply their children with a education.They did the same thing when there was a draft,If you go to college you avoid the draft
We're not in 2000. We're in 2010, and the 2010 rates would stay the same in 2011 and 2012. No lost revenue.
Quote:
Where in this "compromise" are the spending cuts? If you find them please let me know and I will endorse it. All I can see is this bill says borrow $900bn more not borrow less, or borrow none.
That's what I'd like to know. From what I've been gathering from bits and pieces gleaned from various news sources, the bill is LOADED with 'green energy' grants, and other pork.
In other words, they want to see everyone's taxes increase on Jan 1.
Does this surprise anyone? If they can't play class warfare, then they'll take their bat and ball and go home. Of course many of them were already ordered to go home, they just get to do one more harmful thing before their firing is carried out.
Does this surprise anyone? If they can't play class warfare, then they'll take their bat and ball and go home. Of course many of them were already ordered to go home, they just get to do one more harmful thing before their firing is carried out.
Well, obama laid the failure right in the lap of the liberal dem caucus if taxes go up. I think they are basically posturing, fluffing themselves up to answer to their liberal base. In the end, the votes are there to pass it and I think it will pass.
So, your ok with letting the tax cuts go away for all people? Especially given a big piece of the 900bn is for extension of the middle class cuts.
It wouldn't be this much if there were cuts...as I don't hear either side say lets cut.....eventually entitlements/military will have to be evaluated regardless of how much people scream...
It would not be borrowing if the leaders of the Govt actually decided not to spend eyond what their revenue is.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene
So..the government was forced to spend money they don't have because of the tax cuts ten years ago?
Cut spending then. As many like to say - we don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
You don't seem to be getting this. I agree we should cut spending, but in regards to this particular "compromise" that is neither here nor there. If there were spending cuts coupled with this "deal" I wouldn't have a problem with it, but there aren't.
Both sides have agreed to extending tax cuts for the middle tax. Tax cuts for the highest earners is where the disagreement lies.
Perhaps the orange man will hold a press conference and explain why he is holding up the extension of unemployment benefits, plus tax breaks for the middle class, just so he can get tax breaks for the upper 2% of earners..
So, you base your "opinion" by how you percieve them to look? Insulting someone because you disagree with him is pathetic and imature. IMO, there are many on here who don't even read what you have to say.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
