It boggles my mind that apparently to the majority of US citizens deficit reduction was not their #1 priority. I knew Obama would win, but it is dis-heartening to see where most Americans' priorities are.
Out of sight, out of mind. Just like credit cards, people think it's free money. Spend spend spend..... but one day it will come back to bite us in the ass.
Yeah it really boggles my mind as well. I know civil rights are important; but if we don't have a strong economy; then our country is going to shit. Hopefully the net 4 years Obama will learn from the terrible mistakes he's made in the white house and try and bring the country together. Follow the constitution and actually have a budget that can chip away from our national debt. If he doesn't, then I doubt we will see a majority Democratic rule in any of the governments.
Don't question the social issues. Until the republicans or a new party takes a socially liberal stand, it'll be really hard to tear those votes away.
Well it is a good idea, the social issues aren't what is going to save this union. We will be bankrupt if we keep this up.
Not true!! President Obama stated he will lower the deficit. The House wants to lower it as well. So I am sure the President's next budget will have that as a part of it unless he introduces some new legislation to do so.
He can want to lower the deficit; but if he doesn't have a budget; then it's just an idea. There needs to be major spending cuts; and he's already cut too much of many Republican spending avenues. Now he must cut into the Democrat heavily favored issues; which will make him extremely unpopular in his party. I think it's funny that taxing the 1% higher is viewed as cutting into the deficit. http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2012/07/is-raising-marginal-tax-rates-on-higher-income-individuals-a-good-idea-becker.html This is what I was going at. These 1% will not work as hard and reduce their US investments because their is no incentive to invest in America. They can stuff their "Swiss Bank Accounts" and invest in other countries like China or parts of Africa. And Obama can't tax them on those investments. Basically, money in America will lower by investments from the 1%.
People weren't fussing when Bush ran up deficits in a strong economy. Getting all drama queened up for bigger deficits in a weak economy does not make sense. In other words, the budget problem is a problem caused by both parties and one that we need to address together. Finger pointing doesn't accomplish anything and it's not accurate. If we're going to go the finger pointing route, then we can spend hours and days discussing whether Bush or Obama screwed up the budget more. At the end of the accusations, nothing will have been accomplished and no one will be convinced one way or another. How about ideas to make things better? Personally, I'd offer up decreases to unemployment benefits -- can't say I've read up on it lately, but last I heard, it went two years and that's way too long, if true.
Excuse me? http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_...s-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/ Bush needed 8 years to increase the debt 4.899 trillion; while it only took Obama 4 years to match Bush's 8 year reign.
Read this article, written in 2006, and get back to me. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/10/bush_agonistes.html The frustration of conservatives, who constitute the Republican Party's core, with many actions of George W. Bush and the Republican Congress is hardly news. I quote dozens of prominent conservative commentators complaining about Bush's policies and proposals dating all the way back to the 2000 election in my book "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy."
Just did and it's good to see...I don't think it captured the prevailing attitude of the time, but I like it.
How is it possible, at all, to compromise on deficit reduction? One side demands tax hikes to cover historically high levels of govt. spending. And they offer "cuts" that aren't cuts at all. "Instead of spending 10000000 $trillion, we'll only spend 1000 $trillion" even though we're only spending 4 $trillion now. It's a cut in the massive increase in spending. So it's easy to offer what look to be "big" cuts.
It was the prevailing attitude of the time. I remember after each budget year the complaints among republicans about how govt. spending was growing at a rate much faster than inflation. On all things, especially left-wing social type programs. FWIW.
It's not an excuse, it's pointing out that the problem has gone on longer than Obama and happened with both parties. If anything, I'm saying let's stop pointing fingers (which accomplishes squat) and start working together to find solutions.
