|
View Poll Results: How is Obama doing? (poll started 6/6) | |||
Great - above my expectations | 18 | 6.87% | |
Good - met most of my expectations | 66 | 25.19% | |
Average - so so, disappointed a little | 64 | 24.43% | |
Bad - sold us out | 101 | 38.55% | |
Trout - don't know yet | 13 | 4.96% | |
Voters: 262. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools |
05-16-2011, 07:31 PM | #13901 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
Quote:
I think that was my example about the city parks. I'm just happy that this is taken a little bit more seriously by both parties, but obviously not seriously enough. I recall late last year some here were bemoaning all this "fiscal responsibility" talk, esp. as it was being linked to the tea party. Maybe it was (and is) a real issue after all, as some have been talking about for several years now? |
|
05-16-2011, 07:32 PM | #13902 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
Isn't this why we have nuclear missiles and troops all over the world? Who is coming to collect these bills? I hate the military industrial complex but that doesn't mean I don't understand its purpose. You say the world will stop using the US dollar as its reserve currency if the US goes bankrupt. I disagree. Anyways I don't want a default anyways I want major cuts and could even deal with more taxes. I think it is such bullshit to say there are only two choices and ignoring this completely (default or raising the debt limit). How disingenuous is that? |
|
05-16-2011, 07:33 PM | #13903 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
|
|
05-16-2011, 07:34 PM | #13904 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Massachusetts
|
Quote:
LOOK....even with massive cuts today and more taxes (both of which are needed) YOU STILL HAVE TO RAISE THE DEBT LIMIT TODAY!!!!! What about that don't you understand??? And yes - both sides are to blame for voting to raise it for years and years and pushing the burden onto my generation instead of dealing with shit. I will point out that AGAIN that if we're talking fiscal responsibility - the last president to actually ya know...get a balanced budget passed and leave office with a SURPLUS was a Democrat.
__________________
Get bent whoever hacked my pw and changed my signature. Last edited by DaddyTorgo : 05-16-2011 at 07:37 PM. |
|
05-16-2011, 07:37 PM | #13905 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
You (RainMaker) and I and everyone else know what is going to happen in the short-term. Instead of accepting the status quo right away, let's see if some (or a little bit of) real changes can take place. Too many people trying to protect their little fiefdoms, perks and massive beauracracies. Taxations can be raised if people know that it won't go towards even more out-of-contol expenditures. But first they have to prove they can enact real cuts (not piddling $40-60 billion).
|
05-16-2011, 07:37 PM | #13906 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
I think it's bullshit to say that you can somehow balance the budget in the middle of the year by just making some cuts. Most of our spending is entrenched in our system. We can't just say "well we don't need these things this month". We have contracts for things that are years in advance. We have entitlements that have been promised to people. Fixing the deficit is a long term proposition, not just crossing out a few things on the budget.
|
05-16-2011, 07:38 PM | #13907 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
Oh come on. Voting to raise debt limits without any agreement whatsoever on any spending cuts or tax increases is just letting these mother fuckers continue to do whatever they want. But we are going broke exponentially. We do study civilizations that do this exact thing throughout ancient history. They didn't want to try and deal with the problem either. |
|
05-16-2011, 07:40 PM | #13908 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
OK, but they aren't even trying. I don't know where in this thread the last debt limit debate was but they did nothing since that one to change how Washington DC works at all. Nothing. |
|
05-16-2011, 07:40 PM | #13909 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
Quote:
Oh great, DT showed up. Guess you won't ever add "and a Republican Congress" after that, will you? Or was that before your time? |
|
05-16-2011, 07:41 PM | #13910 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Quote:
Because the debt limit issue is as simple as vote for it or default. The budget issues are complicated and difficult, but the debt limit isn't. Like I said earlier, even if the Ryan budget was passed tomorrow there would still need to be nearly a decade of debt limit increases. And if you could somehow find enough cuts to balance the budget now you'd still need to raise the debt limit for day to day transactions. Even then, the examples we've seen from GB and Ireland point to a contraction in the economy that would reduce tax revenues and force an increase in the debt ceiling. All of the budget issues should be fought out vigorously, but fucking with the debt ceiling is a dangerous game. At some point before we reach an end game the markets are going to panic. When that happens we're in trouble.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
|
05-16-2011, 07:42 PM | #13911 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
The problem is that the biggest expenses are also the ones that the public wants the most. |
|
05-16-2011, 07:44 PM | #13912 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
JPhillips added an important point. While you guys debate the complexity of the budget and deficit, the debt limit vote is very simple. Pay our bills or default. It's one of the more simple votes out there.
|
05-16-2011, 07:47 PM | #13913 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Again, if the GOP would agree to a return to some Clinton era tax rates they could get a lot of spending cuts. They won't, though, so now we're going to play chicken with a catastrophe.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-16-2011, 07:51 PM | #13914 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
Like I said we all spent a lot of time in high school and college studying different civilizations throughout history and wondering "Why did they do that?". Don't know why we think the United States empire is infallible if we continue spending the way that we do. Maybe its time to become the next England or Soviet Union who gave up their world empire. Things certainly sucked in those countries when that happened but life went on. |
|
05-16-2011, 07:54 PM | #13915 | |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
Quote:
Turn that around and it's just as unlikely. You saw the outcry when anyone tried suggest a cut or a reduction in the rate of increase. |
|
05-16-2011, 07:58 PM | #13916 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
But things are different now. Obama would go along with a lot of cuts and in there are enough votes in the Senate to form a block that could get something passed. Couple that with a GOP House and I'm certain a 50/50 cut/tax increase package for a balanced budget in five years could get plenty of Dem support.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-16-2011, 08:04 PM | #13917 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
Which brings up 2012. I have no idea as to the Senate election cycle (if there's one for 2012) but you know I have long advocated a split executive/legislative to do exactly what you proposed. But how do we get such a block in the Senate?
|
05-16-2011, 08:10 PM | #13918 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
It's already there if the GOP will be flexible and it never will be there if the GOP won't be flexible. Just off the top of my head I'd say Lieberman, Macaskill, Conrad, Webb, Nelson, Tester and Manchin would favor a package and Reid would have to go along for it to get to a vote. That's not filibuster proof, but there's certainly enough there for a deal if the GOP would be at all flexible.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers Last edited by JPhillips : 05-16-2011 at 08:10 PM. |
05-16-2011, 09:15 PM | #13919 |
General Manager
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
|
This is jackassery at its finest. Someone should have caught on that the general public put Obama in office because they wanted real change. Both sides have proven that they are totally out of touch with a voting public that will likely look for new alternatives sooner rather than later. It's embarrassing.
|
05-16-2011, 09:31 PM | #13920 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
So lets say Obama gets up tomorrow and says we are going to fix the budget problem by cutting things that actually will cut the deficit. Immediate cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Veterans, and the Defense budget. Does he get 10% of the vote in 2012 after that? |
|
05-16-2011, 09:39 PM | #13921 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
Who knows? Maybe it actually works and he gets 50%+ of the vote from the people who kept their jobs and prospered? Seems like its worth a shot doesn't it? If the politicians are aware that the ship is sinking they have to do something don't they? Its like being a doctor whose patients are all dying of cancer but they keep telling them everything is going to be ok. Are they our parents or our leaders? You might argue that some of them are out of touch. I will give you a few from each party might be but most of them know exactly what is going on and are too scared about losing their part in the system to do anything about it. |
|
05-16-2011, 09:44 PM | #13922 |
Head Coach
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Colorado
|
That's what Leadership is about. You see CEOs doing that, you have seen generals taking the risk and making the sacrifies, you see Governors and Mayors doing that and you've seen leaders of non-profits doing that. The public will go along (and shift in the wind depending if it's American Idol week or not) if they are led (as FDR did during WW2). They will not go along if the system is corrupt and all that is important is to get fucking re-elected. Real sacrifice is giving yourself up for re-election and caring more about the country's finances instead of political party.
|
05-16-2011, 09:48 PM | #13923 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
This isn't a game of Sim City. You can't just walk in and say "lets cut everything by 20% and see what happens". |
|
05-16-2011, 09:50 PM | #13924 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
|
|
05-16-2011, 09:54 PM | #13925 | |
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: St. Louis
|
Quote:
Fuck man. You have to cut something. How is it oversimplifing that this can't continue for very much longer? This isn't a slow build of debt like previous down periods. This is off the chart crazy. You are on a sports sim board I am certain you have some understanding of mathematics. Seriously you can't keep making excuses about how you can't do anything... Last edited by panerd : 05-16-2011 at 09:55 PM. |
|
05-16-2011, 09:56 PM | #13926 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
I'm not saying you can't do anything, I'm saying you can't just walk in a room and fix the deficit overnight by cutting everything. The system is much more complex than you are making it out to be. Cuts and/or increased revenue needs to be made over the course of years and in a way that it won't completely destroy our economy.
|
05-16-2011, 09:57 PM | #13927 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
I generally think the Dems are spineless, but you can't make real progress on the deficit without public buy-in. It's great to say the president should just lead, but future congresses aren't bound by the actions of previous congresses. If Obama and Ryan somehow gutted Medicare the 2012 congress could just create a new Medicare, and that's exactly what would happen if their isn't public buy-in.
That's why this is so hard. The public wants a balanced budget with no cuts to anything they like or tax increases on them personally. Now I think there's a good argument that public opinion can be swayed by effective leaders, but only a little at a time. It can't be flipped dramatically outside of a crisis.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-16-2011, 09:59 PM | #13928 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The Satellite of Love
|
On the bright side, not raising the debt limit could possibly fix our illegal immigration problem.
So there's that. |
05-16-2011, 10:02 PM | #13929 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
In the short/medium term going back to Clinton levels of taxation and military spending comes close to solving the structural budget deficit(all things except lost revenue from the recession). In the long term it's all about medical spending. I don't think the projections are accurate, as I think there will be an eventual leveling off of the increase in the growth rate, but even with that it's still the big problem. There's two ways to fix that problem, either lower the growth in reimbursements or limit the amount of care, neither of which is likely to get off the ground.
There's a deal to be made on the short/medium term budget that's a mix of cuts in discretionary spending/military spending and tax increases. The problem is that deal won't happen as long as the GOP says no revenue can increase.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-16-2011, 10:04 PM | #13930 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Massachusetts
|
Saying "no revenue increase" isn't seriously attempting to fix the problem - it's political posturing. You can't fix a problem by ignoring 50% of it/50% of the potential solution.
|
05-16-2011, 11:26 PM | #13931 | |
Torchbearer
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: On Lake Harriet
|
Quote:
Yeah, let's nuke the hell out of all of those American retirees, mutual fund investors, pension participants and city and state governments who own trillions of dollars of US treasury bonds. That'll show 'em. |
|
05-16-2011, 11:33 PM | #13932 |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
As much as I agree some are maybe underestimating the impact of actually not increasing the debt ceiling, I think others are maybe underestimating the impact of of the status quo. It really doesn't matter, ultimately, if "people don't like it". At least now, for the first time, we're having some real, mainstream discussion on the consequences of this, and a sense of the lengths some are willing to go/threaten to try to get some movement on this process that will of course, take decades whenever we actually get around to starting it. Threatening an action that causes crisis is the closest we've gotten to actually taking that step. What is the Democratic plan, how exactly do they expect to get around the "people won't like it" idea?
Last edited by molson : 05-16-2011 at 11:37 PM. |
05-16-2011, 11:36 PM | #13933 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
Agreed, but stating hypothetically that you'd like "Clinton era tax cuts" without any plan to accomplish that (even during a time when your party controls both houses and the presidency) isn't seriously attempting to fix the problem either. Nice ideas stated out loud are not enough. If we need less spending and more taxes - and Dems don't even seems serious about the more taxes part - how much faith can we have that they're serious about the less spending part? The GOP of course, can't be counted on for the taxes part, but at least they seem to be throwing the kitchen sink at the spending issues. (when are the Dems going to throw anything at the tax issue?) I think its fair to say that (almost) nobody in power actually wants to fix the problem, because it would be too painful politically. So we're all just going to wait until we're at the point of no return. Unless maybe we luck into a crisis/debt ceiling situation that will be disastrous, but perhaps be shorter term and less severe than the real, final correction down the road, and might require us to address this whether or not "people like it" . Last edited by molson : 05-16-2011 at 11:48 PM. |
|
05-17-2011, 12:07 AM | #13934 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
I know you're into the politics as sport crap, but what has the GOP thrown at the spending issues? Can you cite some examples? And I'm not talking about the token cuts that have little to no impact on the deficit. I have yet to see the party get behind cuts to SS, Medicare, or the Defense budget.
|
05-17-2011, 12:17 AM | #13935 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
I'm just talking about the current game of chicken. No, you're right, I didn't mean that they've thrown the kitchen sink at anything beyond that, they've been completely ineffectual as well. But this, at least, seems like a potential game changer if the dems cave, with is always a decent bet to take. And I'd maybe feel more sympathetic about their attacks on that strategy if they had any real strategy of their own (besides giving speeches about wealth inequality, etc.) Who's going to be the first to actually do anything and change this suicidal course? This at least feels like its the closest we've been. Edit: Where's the Dem high-risk strategy to actually accomplish the "taxing the rich more" idea? What can the Dems ever accomplish if not that? I could get behind that too. We need bolder leadership. Is there really no political will to tax even the very rich more? Because it sure seems like a lot of people would be OK with that. Last edited by molson : 05-17-2011 at 12:27 AM. |
|
05-17-2011, 12:40 AM | #13936 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Neither side has a real strategy, it's just trying to score political points. If the GOP cared, they'd be talking about cutting SS, Medicare, and the defense budget. If the Dems cared, they'd be talking about plans to increase taxes. Instead they'll argue about this to get their soundbytes in and that's it. Neither side cares about the deficit and taxpayers don't either as long as they can watch American Idol this week.
The best solution is probably a mix of both. Medicare tax rate should probably increase half a percent or so as medical costs have gone up over the years. Social Security should probably start being taxed again at either $250k or $500k. And getting back to Clinton era tax rates is fair considering we've put ourselves so far in debt. We can discuss lowering them when we've gotten back on track. Spending should also be cut in areas where it can. The military could definitely deal with some cuts and streamlining other areas. Ending some of these wars probably helps too. Medicare needs massive reform and it needs to be written by politicians in favor of constituents and not by the pharmaceutical industry. There should be effort put into finding areas of government that are bloated and cutting them back when it's feasible. Both sides are unreasonable. It's silly to ask for more in taxes without reforming areas that are wasting money. While it's also silly to pretend we can avoid problems without looking at the biggest spenders. |
05-17-2011, 12:58 AM | #13937 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Mountains
|
Quote:
Agreed. The parties had a historically large anti-"wall street", and even a more irrational "anti-rich" sentiment to work with and completely squandered it. I mean, they could have almost gotten away with hanging bankers out in the town square, if they were so inclined (a little exaggeration there, but really, that was the time for reform if anyone was interested in it). The only possibility for change is for the train to come completely off the tracks at some point. All this debt ceiling talk I guess just made me perk up with some thought such a thing might be possible, but that was probably just wishful thinking. We'll get our comprimised deal that puts the issue off and accomplishes nothing. The Republicans won't forfeit 2012 for their (claimed) principles, and the Dems wouldn't (i.e. don't want to) accomplish anything even if they swept the elections in 2012. Last edited by molson : 05-17-2011 at 01:07 AM. |
|
05-17-2011, 08:01 AM | #13938 | |
General Manager
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Kansas City, MO
|
Quote:
Which is exactly my point. The time has come for these officials to start acting like real leaders. This isn't a situation where you can accomplish the needed changes and keep everyone happy. Hard decisions need to be made. |
|
05-17-2011, 08:39 AM | #13939 | |
Pro Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Cary, NC
|
Quote:
Yup. Stop the bread and circuses, stop buying votes, accept that it may get you thrown out of office, whatever, do what's RIGHT for the country for a change. Stop pandering to the vocal minority that makes for great soundbites. I'd love to see the news people start reporting actual NEWS. They help stir up all the fears about social security, medicare, etc without being honest about costs. If they were being honest and reporting the facts, folks would be far more scared of NOT cutting these programs. They could also be honest about tax cuts / raises as well isntead of fear-mongering. I put defense in a separate category, I think the media in general would be happy with that cut, but it makes for great political argument when you talk about job losses due to closing bases / factories and that needs to be cut off. If those two things happened, the politicians might not even need to fear re-election. But alas, we'll just have to drive this bus right off a cliff before either side does what's right. We can blame Republicans all we want, all this debt ceiling thing does is drive the buss off the cliff a bit sooner, the fact remains that the Dems don't want to hear about spending cuts either. Both sides need to just cave. If they both piss off large chunks of the country, who is really going to lose in the next election? Roll back the Bush tax cuts, cut social security, medicare, and defense, and both sides lose, which means we all win. But you need the media on board to make it happen.
__________________
-- Greg -- Author of various FOF utilities |
|
05-17-2011, 09:38 AM | #13940 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Quote:
But the problem is that there isn't a single RIGHT thing to do. The parties have vastly different views of what the U.S. government should do and those views can't easily be reconciled. The GOP wants to dismantle large portions of the New Deal and the Dems aren't willing to do that, meanwhile the public seems to want both at the same time. Without arguing about who is right, how do you bridge that gap?
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
|
05-17-2011, 09:51 AM | #13941 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA
|
Quote:
Throw in the argument over who should do the paying for whatever remains funded and you'd have a downright enthusiastic +1 from me.
__________________
"I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis |
|
05-17-2011, 11:42 AM | #13942 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
|
|
05-17-2011, 12:39 PM | #13943 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
I think you're wrong if you believe the GOP and the Dems have the same view on SS and Medicare. I'll give you that everything else is on the table, but there's no way the Democratic Party survives if they allow the dismantling of their two greatest accomplishments.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-17-2011, 01:09 PM | #13944 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
There are different views on how they should be run. But there isn't a debate over whether we should have them. What kind of stuff are you seeing that shows otherwise? |
|
05-17-2011, 01:15 PM | #13945 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
Quote:
Despite what's been done to us, the anti-government contingent is often as strong as the anti-corporate establishment. There are people who actually think banks care about them and will do what's best for them. That turning over hundreds of billions of dollars to these people and not having any strings attached is perfectly acceptable. There were actually people arguing that we couldn't tell insolvent banks what kind of bonuses they could give out with our own fucking money that saved the bank. The Donald Trumping of our country has taken full effect. I'm not talking about his recent stuff, but this glorification of wealthy businessmen as some saintly figures who do everything great. Last edited by RainMaker : 05-17-2011 at 01:16 PM. |
|
05-17-2011, 01:44 PM | #13946 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Quote:
All but four GOP House members voted to replace Medicare with vouchers and cut Social Security benefits for the median family by nearly 40%. The GOP did expand Medicare Part D, but the current crop is on record as wanting to eliminate what we know as Medicare and severally curtail Social Security.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
|
05-17-2011, 02:00 PM | #13947 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
|
When was the Medicare voucher program votes on by the House?
|
05-17-2011, 02:02 PM | #13948 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
It's the centerpiece of the Ryan budget. Without it that budget comes nowhere close to balanced over a seventy-five year projection.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
05-17-2011, 02:27 PM | #13949 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Massachusetts
|
The fact that we talk about balancing budgets over a period of 75 years is ridiculous frankly. If it takes a budget 75 years to get balanced then it's not a true balanced budget - there's some unrealistic assumptions or something going on in there (and yes, that's true regardless of if it's a (D) or an (R) budget).
|
05-17-2011, 06:48 PM | #13950 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newburgh, NY
|
Repealing tax subsidies for oil companies just died through filibuster.
__________________
To love someone is to strive to accept that person exactly the way he or she is, right here and now.. - Mr. Rogers |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 32 (0 members and 32 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|