published Friday, January 25th, 2013

Next in the budget show

Until this week, Republicans had been threatening again to hold the nation's economy and credit rating hostage in yet another debt-ceiling crisis to leverage a new federal budget with deep cuts in social spending.

But on Wednesday Republicans wisely punted. Perhaps recalling how their 2011 debacle hurt the nation's credit rating and economy, House leaders said they would simply "suspend" the debt ceiling, until May, while Congress works toward a new budget.

That action implicitly suggests that Republicans wanted to avoid a new showdown with President Obama over the debt ceiling. He already had warned that he would not negotiate or mandate unwarranted cuts in earned entitlements and other safety net programs.

The surface technical question from their cave-in is whether the debt ceiling -- if it can be suspended so easily while federal spending runs over it -- is really the big legislative deal they've made it into since Obama replaced a free-spending, debt-ceiling-breaking Republican?

In this case, it's essential to remember that a Republican-controlled Congress casually raised the debt ceiling seven times while George W. Bush was doubling the federal debt to finance deep tax cuts and two costly wars. Part of the Obama debt is to pay for the lingering pipeline costs of those wars and for rebuilding the military's machinery. If debt-ceiling boundaries really are so flexible -- as they must be to pay for spending already approved by Congress in earlier years -- the debt ceiling mechanism should just be abandoned, and more intense focus placed on annual and long-term budgets.

In any case, the bipartisan 285-142 House vote to suspend the debt ceiling is welcome. It suggests Republicans recognize the economic message of the November election: That voters support a balanced approach to lowering federal debt, with tax reform aimed at closing bulldozer-sized loopholes in the tax code for businesses and corporations; and with measured cuts in federal spending on safety and social spending.

Congress must get to the core of that issue, with or without an artificial debt ceiling. The question now is whether and how the House budget process, driven by hard-right Republicans who want to disastrously chop Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a score of other vital services, can be reconciled with a Democratic-controlled Senate that has demanded a "balanced approach" between service-cuts and revenue-generating measures through tax reform.

This impasse is already three-years old. Senate Democrats have refused to present a budget without revenue increases since 2009, and reasonably so. Tax revenue has been at a near-record low of less than 16 percent of gross domestic product, well below the norm of 18.5 percent of GDP, since the Great Recession hit in 2008. If Republicans won't bargain on revenue increases, why should Senate Democrats bargain solely about austerity cuts in social services that would further damage the economy?

Both sides, however, now need to present a reasonable compromise. And the driver for that -- the budget sequesters mandated in 2011 for across-the-board cuts -- will arrive again in March. That leaves little time to waste, and no sense in putting off hard, detailed budget proposals from both sides.

Kicking this can down the road again makes no sense. It would be as meaningless as the "No budget, no pay" bill that Republican House members passed this week, despite the 27th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that bars them from cutting their pay in the same session the legislation was passed. Such showboating must be replaced by substantive congressional action.

33
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
timbo said...

This idiot Harry Austin has written the same version of this article several times. Basically saying that the Republicans are terrible because they want the address the $16 trillion debt by cutting spending. We basically know what Harry won't do, but what will he do.

Why don't you write an article answering these questions: Specifically, how would you deal with the $16 trillion debt? What programs would you cut, or would you cut any programs at all?

These are simple questions that liberals don't seem to be able to answer.

Maybe the answer is "hope and change." That's saying is still a big joke today as it was in 2008.

Well, I might just save you some time writing that article Harry. Simply, you Liberals want to tax your way out of this problem as usual.

Go-ahead Harry, Write another article about how bad the Republicans are and how Great Obama is and how you guys just want "balance." Don't worry, the weenie Republicans will probably cave again.

January 27, 2013 at 9:11 a.m.
Easy123 said...

bimbo,

Why don't you answer your own questions?

Specifically, how would you deal with the $16 trillion debt? What programs would you cut, or would you cut any programs at all?

January 27, 2013 at 12:04 p.m.
timbo said...

slEasy321....I am not a pseudo-intellectual, liberal highly paid editorial writer like Austin or a two-bit politician on either side but I will give it a try.

First of all, I would use the standard way that businesses deal with these problems everyday. The feds have the debt which is already owed and a yearly spending deficit of 1 trillion dollars. The debt can't be dealt with until you stop the bleeding. You do this two ways cutting spending and raising revenue. Cutting spending is not complicated but raising revenue is. To raise revenues the democrats want to raise taxes. The Republicans want to increase economic growth to increase revenues. There comes the rub.

To reduce the yearly red ink I would:

  1. Lay-off 15% of the non-military federal workforce in the next 18 months. This should be done in 5% increments. 5% now without delay. 5 % by not replacing retirees and or increasing the size of departments. Then another lay-off spaced over the next 18 months. Savings - $200 billion

  2. Calling for an additional 10% of operating budgets from every department in government including the military. Everyone and every department can cut back 10% without even feeling it. Since the 2012 federal budget was 3.796 trillion...Savings 380 billion dollars

  3. Purchase better by eliminating crony capitalism, sweetheart deals, and "shopping" much better. This was Harry Truman's claim to fame and how he became Vice-President. Savings- $50 billion?

  4. Reduce entitlements by cutting back unemployment benifits and social programs like foodstamps. We could just go back to the pre-Obama numbers and save a bunch. Savings - $15 billion

  5. If we did all this, I and most conservatives would be willing to pay more taxes. AGAIN ONLY IF SPENDING WAS CUT AND NO ADDITIONAL SPENDING ADDED. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN IRON CLAD AGREEMENT. You liberals say "we are in this together" and then tax a certain segment of society while 50% get off the hook. Everyone should pay, everyone. Revenues $250 billion

So let's see,,, the total is $895 billion dollars. That would basically eliminate the yearly federal deficit.

After budget is balanced, we can start looking at how to reduce the debt. That can't be done until spending is curbed and the budget is balanced to stop the bleeding.

This won't happen because the rotten politicians on both sides use that money to get elected by handing out goodies. Both parties are so corrupt they would make Al Capone look honest.

In other words, we are doomed to be Greece so what I just wrote, what you write, especially what Harry Austin writes, is useless because nothing will change until the manure hits the fan.

Is that "specific" enough for you?

January 28, 2013 at 10:49 a.m.
Easy123 said...

It was your question. I guess you forgot what you wrote. I just put the ball in your court instead of letting your question to the author of this article go unanswered.

January 28, 2013 at 5:57 p.m.
joneses said...

Timbo,

I am not willing to pay more taxes as I like others are already paying in local, state, and federal taxes almost 50% of what I make. Sorry but that is enough of my money being confiscated. And please call raising revenues what it is, raising taxes. Do not fall for the liberal spin.

January 29, 2013 at 7:54 a.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

This article claims that Republicans want to "disastrously chop Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and a score of other vital services. . . ." Exactly what are these disastrous chops?

January 29, 2013 at 12:52 p.m.
Easy123 said...

timbo,

Looks like your WingNut buddies aren't on the same page as you.

January 30, 2013 at 5:48 a.m.
Easy123 said...

joneses,

"paying in local, state, and federal taxes almost 50% of what I make"

Bullsh!t

"And please call raising revenues what it is, raising taxes."

Raising revenues is not limited to raising taxes, moron. You've already fallen for the idiot spin.

January 30, 2013 at 5:49 a.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

Easy, first, huffingtonpost is no different then foxnews so how can you demonize foxnews, and then rely on huffingtonpost for your information? Huffingtonpost is basically the left's version of foxnews. That's called being a hypocrite.

Second, what are these disastrous cuts? Raising the age of eligibility? Privatizing Medicare by creating competing private options giving seniors gasp greater choice of healthcare plans? If that's the case then I don't think you understand the definition of disastrous.

January 30, 2013 at 2:08 p.m.
timbo said...

slEasy..... Just seeing the difference between a conservative and a Republican. I am a conservative.

January 30, 2013 at 4:50 p.m.
Easy123 said...

NirvanaFallacy,

"huffingtonpost is no different then foxnews"

Demonstrably false. Would you prefer me to provide a link to another website saying the same thing?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/01/23/latest-gop-budget-scheme-would-slash-federal-government-to-ribbons/

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100271782/GOP_039Cliff039039_Plan_Cut_Medicare_and_Social_Security

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/republican-social-security-cuts

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/dec/01/news/la-pn-gop-targets-entitlements-fiscal-cliff-20121201

http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/budget/274907-fiscal-cliff-talks-hit-by-setback-over-social-security-benefits

http://www.salon.com/2012/12/30/gop_demands_social_security_cuts_setting_back_fiscal_talks/

Is that better?

"so how can you demonize foxnews,"

Because of their track record of being partisan hacks.

"and then rely on huffingtonpost for your information?"

The two are very different. The information is all over the Internet as you can see.

"Huffingtonpost is basically the left's version of foxnews."

No, it isn't.

"That's called being a hypocrite."

Again, no, it isn't. You're grasping at straws.

"If that's the case then I don't think you understand the definition of disastrous."

It would be disastrous to the current benefits. People don't support any cuts to those programs.

January 30, 2013 at 6:55 p.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

Easy you are a partisan hack who needs to be force feed ideas because you can't come up with anything on your own. You honestly think that huffingtonpost is an objective nonpartisan news source? I mean really, you can't be serious?

You need to read a book or get an education, just do something other than posting nonsense here all day. Try and come up with some of your own original ideas rather than relying on partisan websites like motherjones and huffingtonpost.

January 30, 2013 at 8:03 p.m.
Easy123 said...

NirvanaFallacy,

"you are a partisan hack who needs to be force feed ideas because you can't come up with anything on your own."

You're talking out of your ass.

"You honestly think that huffingtonpost is an objective nonpartisan news source?"

Did I say that? I said it wasn't equivalent to Fox News.

"I mean really, you can't be serious?"

Can you be serious? You seem to have a hard time being objective or logical.

"You need to read a book or get an education, just do something other than posting nonsense here all day."

Another instance of you talking out of your ass. You can't read a book or get an education to get rid yourself of the ridiculousness that is your wold view.

"Try and come up with some of your own original ideas rather than relying on partisan websites like motherjones and huffingtonpost."

You asked what "chops" Republicans were proposing to SS, Medicare and Medicaid. I provided 7 links that answered that question. What original idea was I supposed to come up with regarding your question other than the facts?

Seriously, are you insane and/or drunk? Nothing you are saying is accurate or sensible. But I didn't expect anything less after you tried to debase a source that answered your question accurately. Are the sources I provided accurate or not? That's what I thought. Your ignorance and idiocy knows no bounds.

January 30, 2013 at 8:18 p.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

I asked a question and you answered by merely citing news articles with no explanation or even the slightest attempt to answer the question yourself. Therefore it seems you are incapable of formulating your own ideas. Again, I suggest you educate yourself - read a book, go to college, do something. Then, you can try and sway people to your side.

January 30, 2013 at 9:22 p.m.
Easy123 said...

NirvanaFallacy,

"I asked a question and you answered by merely citing news articles with no explanation or even the slightest attempt to answer the question yourself."

The answer was in the 7 links I presented. Therefore, I'm actually the only one of the two of us that actually did answer the question. I answered it in the form of seven links you could go to that all contained the same information. But, for some reason, your moronic sensibilities have lead you to believe that I didn't answer the question. Weren't you bitching about my sources earlier? Were the sources incorrect? I didn't think so.

"Therefore it seems you are incapable of formulating your own ideas."

I cannot formulate ideas about information I'm not privy to. You wanted an answer and I provided a vehicle for which you could obtain that answer. In no way does that have anything to do with not having my own ideas. I wasn't presenting my own ideas. I was presenting the factual answer to a question. This is me formulating my own ideas: You're really grasping or you're very, very stupid. I can't decide which. I'm leaning towards both.

"Again, I suggest you educate yourself - read a book, go to college, do something."

I guarantee that I am more highly educated than yourself. Even still, I would probably not obtain the information you sought from a book or a formal college education considering that information is only a few weeks old. I would, however, find it in the vast archives of the Internet. Does that sound familiar? Oh wait, that's exactly what I did. I suggest you get a lobotomy or some type of shock therapy to deal with the irrational thoughts you are currently having.

"Then, you can try and sway people to your side."

I'm not trying to sway people to my side. I answered your question. Sever times over actually. It is not my fault that you went into this mindless rant. You must be insane or drunk because no rational person can think the way you are currently thinking. As I said before, your ignorance and idiocy knows no bounds at this point.

January 31, 2013 at 1:36 a.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

Easy, you obviously have never taken any classes past high school because you can't even understand why coping and pasting a bunch of website articles does not equal a "factual answer to a question." Try doing that in any college or graduate work and see how well your grade turns out. Not to say that a formal college education automatically equals intelligence, but it at least might help fix your willful ignorance.

January 31, 2013 at 11:31 a.m.
timbo said...

slEasy321...do you have a picture of NirvanaFallacy talking out of his/her ass? That would be an internet sensation.

slEasy321...I love it when you comment...you are just proving how stupid liberals really are. Keep commenting and helping the conservative cause.

January 31, 2013 at 2:25 p.m.
Easy123 said...

NirvanaFallacy,

"you obviously have never taken any classes past high school because you can't even understand why coping and pasting a bunch of website articles does not equal a "factual answer to a question.""

I've taken copious amounts of classes past high school. The links I provided contained a factual answer to the question you asked. That's how you were able to type this sentence: "what are these disastrous cuts? Raising the age of eligibility? Privatizing Medicare by creating competing private options giving seniors gasp greater choice of healthcare plans?". You read that from the article I provided.

"Try doing that in any college or graduate work and see how well your grade turns out."

Obviously, you're deluded enough to think the TFP comment section is equivalent to a college test or paper. Again, was the information in the links I provided correct or not? You cannot provide an answer to this question because you know the answer totally debases your whole, incoherent, idiotic rant.

"Not to say that a formal college education automatically equals intelligence, but it at least might help fix your willful ignorance."

This is another yet example of you talking out of your ass. The ignorance is flowing from you. It is very apparent that you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and you are desperately grasping at straws.

You truly have to be one of the most deluded individuals I've ever come in contact with.

January 31, 2013 at 2:59 p.m.
Easy123 said...

bimbo,

"I love it when you comment...you are just proving how stupid liberals really are. Keep commenting and helping the conservative cause."

I see you want to join NirvanaFallacy and talk out of your ass. You're a member of the failing party. You're a member of the "stupid" party as Bobby Jindal put it. Your party is failing and you know it. The lies you spout here only serve to discredit you, but you discredited yourself and your party long ago with your mindless rants, misinformation, lies, and your attempts to yell in your posts by using capital letters.

I encourage you to keep posting as well. You wouldn't have to post to discredit your own side and help your opposition because so many members of your own part do that for you. But, if it makes you feel good, go right ahead. I'll still be here making you look like a fool.

January 31, 2013 at 3:08 p.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

Easy you are clearly the only one with a clue. Not only are you an expert in using google to find website articles and then copy and paste those articles here, but you also have mastered the art of debate. We should all strive to reach your level of intelligence.

January 31, 2013 at 3:30 p.m.
timbo said...

slEasy321......Thank you. Hit me again,...please.

January 31, 2013 at 3:38 p.m.
Easy123 said...

NirvanaFallacy,

"you are clearly the only one with a clue."

You'd be wrong again.

"Not only are you an expert in using google to find website articles and then copy and paste those articles here, but you also have mastered the art of debate."

It wasn't a debate. You asked a question and I provided seven articles with the answer to that question.

"We should all strive to reach your level of intelligence."

At this point, you should be striving for even the lowest level of intelligence because nothing you are saying makes sense in context of what is actually going on in this thread. You're grasping and you're looking like a fool doing it.

January 31, 2013 at 3:42 p.m.
Easy123 said...

bimbo,

"Thank you. Hit me again,...please."

I'll let you do that all by yourself, bimbo. LMFAO! Apparently, you turn into a masochist when you have no rebuttal.

January 31, 2013 at 3:47 p.m.
timbo said...

NirvanaFallacy....come on now....slEasy did use the big word "copious." Although I don't recall a degree in COPIOUS. You would think, when discussing one's education, that if it was college they would say that they had college experience instead of "copious amounts of classes past high school."

I only have an advanced degree and have not reached "copious amounts," as of yet.

By the way, slEasy said, " Obviously, you're deluded enough to think the TFP comment section is equivalent to a college test or paper."

slEasy321 was right....and no one has proven that more than slEasy321 and the rest of her pinko friends.

January 31, 2013 at 3:47 p.m.
timbo said...

slEasy321....Hit me in the reBUTTal...then you can kiss it.

January 31, 2013 at 3:50 p.m.
Easy123 said...

bimbo,

"You would think, when discussing one's education, that if it was college they would say that they had college experience instead of "copious amounts of classes past high school."

The statement by NirvanaFallacy mentioned "classes past high school", not my degree or college experience. Try again.

"they would say that they had college experience instead of "copious amounts of classes past high school."

I have a Bachelor's degree and a Master's degree. I am currently working on my J.D.

"I only have an advanced degree and have not reached "copious amounts," as of yet."

If you haven't taken a copious amount of classes past high school then you couldn't obtain any degree. Do you see how nonsensical you are? LMFAO!

"and no one has proven that more than slEasy321 and the rest of her pinko friends."

Other than you and your ilk that spew the same lies and misinformation here daily? LMFAO! "Deluded" is too mild a word to describe you, bimbo. Your idiocy is palpable.

January 31, 2013 at 3:56 p.m.
Easy123 said...

bimbo,

"Hit me in the reBUTTal...then you can kiss it."

I already "hit you with a rebuttal". And you've been kissing mine all day.

Your 5th grade puns aren't very clever.

January 31, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

Easy, no offense, but if you have a Bachelor's degree and a Master's degree as you claim, then I think you need to ask for your money back. Currently working on your J.D. huh? Assuming this is true, let me go out on a limb and guess that your law school isn't accredited.

As someone that actually has a J.D., I'd have to guess that when you say you are "currently working on [your] J.D." you mean you read the legal articles written for the New York Times and Huffingtonpost.

January 31, 2013 at 9:34 p.m.
Easy123 said...

NirvanaFallacy,

"no offense, but if you have a Bachelor's degree and a Master's degree as you claim, then I think you need to ask for your money back."

I would say the same thing about your supposed "advanced" degree but that would be redundant. Any "advanced" degree that you have is only of your mind.

"Currently working on your J.D. huh? Assuming this is true, let me go out on a limb and guess that your law school isn't accredited."

That limb just broke.

"As someone that actually has a J.D."

LMFAO! There is no possible way that is even remotely possible considering how utterly moronic everything you say is.

"I'd have to guess that when you say you are "currently working on [your] J.D." you mean you read the legal articles written for the New York Times and Huffingtonpost."

And I'd have to guess that when you say "as someone that actually has a J.D.", you actually mean "I'm just talking out of my ass, as usual.". You wouldn't do very well in the law profession considering how easily your attempted to dismiss multiple instances of authenticated, coinciding evidence that answered your question.

Seriously, you're bordering on dangerous levels of senselessness. Would you like to keep going? LMFAO!

January 31, 2013 at 9:59 p.m.
NirvanaFallacy said...

If it wasn't so sad, it be funny. The fact you honestly think you are convincing anyone that you have any sort of college degree is laughable. But you must live in some type of fantasy world if you think anyone who has read your rambling posts thinks you are working on getting your J.D.

Congrats on being able to use a dictionary though. I mean clearly your ability to scatter random big words here and there obviously proves you have spent some time in higher education. And everyone knows that all attorneys just declare everything that they happen to disagree with as moronic. You are a joke.

January 31, 2013 at 11:18 p.m.
Easy123 said...

NirvanaFallacy,

"If it wasn't so sad, it be funny. The fact you honestly think you are convincing anyone that you have any sort of college degree is laughable."

I'm not trying to convince anyone. I stated my credentials. I truly do not care if you believe me or not. The fact that you're still rambling on about nothing is highly comical to me. I'm sure you'll have something else to say about it but I wouldn't expect anything less from a blithering idiot like yourself. It's not sad or funny at all. I think "ridiculous" would describe your faulty effort to attack me for no reason.

"But you must live in some type of fantasy world if you think anyone who has read your rambling posts thinks you are working on getting your J.D."

Again, I do not care if you or anyone else believes me. I'm not the one rambling. You seem the be the professional at that. You started off with an idiotic argument about something entirely different and now you're questioning whether or not I have the credentials I have stated that I have. Who is rambling? LMFAO!

"Congrats on being able to use a dictionary though. I mean clearly your ability to scatter random big words here and there obviously proves you have spent some time in higher education."

I never stated or implied that my vocabulary had anything to do with my eduction. The fact that you're trying to demonize my vocabulary is evidence enough to discredit you. If you're jealous of me knowing what words mean, you can just come out and say so. Again, you're really grasping. As a lawyer, I would expect you to appreciate an expressive vocabulary. LMFAO! I guess you're one of those backwoods barristers.

"And everyone knows that all attorneys just declare everything that they happen to disagree with as moronic."

What does this have to do with anything? I'm not an attorney and this isn't a courtroom. I'm sure plenty of attorney's would use that description if they were dealing with you. I'm simply stating facts as I see them. You have been talking out of your ass for nearly an entire day now. There are a lot of other words I could use to characterize you if "moronic" doesn't suit your taste.

"You are a joke."

I've been implying that about you all day. You have absolutely no clue what you're even talking about at this point. You're just grasping for ways to attempt to insult me and it isn't working. You continue to make yourself look like a fool with every single one of your unfounded posts directed toward me.

I encourage you to keep going with this inane rambling.

January 31, 2013 at 11:35 p.m.
AliciaS said...

I am just super tired with this constant finger pointing. Isn't it enough simple talks? They are talking about creating a new budget, well alright then, why not doing something instead of talking. Time flies so fast that we will be soon facing another debt ceiling and our Politicians will still be talking about changes. I do understand that everything is very complicated, it's just we do not have any time to wait until they come up with some decision. Alicia from https://paydayloansat.com online company

February 4, 2013 at 5:22 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.