Obama to propose spending freeze

www.politico.com...

I strongly disagree with this proposal, I am a Libertarian Democrat so I support fiscal discipline but this is crazy. He will continue his huge size military spending while cutting everything else.

President Obama plans to announce a three-year freeze on discretionary, “non-security” spending in the lead-up to Wednesday's State of the Union address, Hill Democratic sources familiar with the plan tell POLITICO.

The move, intended to blunt the populist backlash against Obama's $787 billion stimulus and an era of trillion-dollar deficits — and to quell Democratic anxiety over last Tuesday's Massachusetts Senate election — is projected to save $250 billion, the Democrats said.

The freeze would not apply to defense spending or spending on intelligence, homeland security or veterans.

[edit on 25-1-2010 by Misoir]

reply to post by Misoir


This is a crock. (no offense Op)

As we approach next November , if not sooner , you can expect a Huge

Stimulus Package.

The package will be geared towards Job Creation , and Small Business.

( I think I just made my first ATS prediction)

If I have learned anything is that whatever Obama says he is for, he is against. If he says he is going to stop something, he wont, in fact he means he will do more.

My point is that no matter what Obama states, his true intention is to the opposite. A double speak politician that is easy to understand once you know he never means anything he says he is for and is for everything he claims he is against.

Oh well, I'm sure you get the idea.

This is hilarious... he is freezing "Discretionary spending", except for most everything "Discretionary spending" is spent on.

Thats like freezing spending on gas, except for whats needed for the car.

"Discretionary spending in FY 2009 is $1.3 trillion, or 32.5% of total spending. More than half ($666 billion) is what the OMB calls Security spending: the Department of Defense and "overseas contigency programs."

useconomy.about.com...

It doesn't make any difference anyway. Anybody else see that number on Drudge? Is that 12 quadrillion? It's over.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Their planned passage of health care has stalled, along with other revenue rich legislation which would have eventually offset some of their massive spending.

Make no mistake this is a TAX and spend government, though they jumped the gun on the spending without getting all of their new taxes implemented through legislation, including massive taxes from health care reform and cap and trade energy reforms. While these would have changed little for years the taxes would have been immediate ... If they could have pushed it all through.

Their unsustainable and noncollectable spending has caught them in a bad situation... They have to cut spending ... and it will have to be massive cuts until they can come up with new ways to TAX everyone and everything... Give them time... that will happen... Then they can go back to their insane spending.



[edit on 25-1-2010 by Walkswithfish]

insanity... so instead of ending the wars and using that money to cut the deficeit, he freezes spending on all domestic programs EXCEPT his wars.... why did his a$$ get elected?

It would cover the agencies and programs for which Congress allocates specific budgets each year, from air traffic control and farm subsidies to education, nutrition and national parks.

But it would exempt the Pentagon, foreign aid, the Veterans Administration and homeland security budgets, as well as the entitlement programs that make up the biggest and fastest-growing part of the federal budget, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

The payoff in budget savings would be small relative to the deficit: The estimated $250 billion in savings over 10 years is less than 5 percent of the $9 trillion to $10 trillion in additional debt the government is expected to accumulate over that time.

www.nytimes.com...

Reply to post by TheCoffinman

The taxing entity always does this. They spend themselves into oblivion then to convince the voting morons to succumb to, nay beg, to be taxed evermore the taxing entity cuts payment to the "good" expenses to pu the public in distress.

Your local gov does it everytime thy announce cuts to schools, police or fire departments while they never cut anything in administration or any benefits going to the friends or supporters o the mayor or governor and here we see the fed doing it tithe nation. It's high time the voting mass takes notice of the pattern.

For the record I am opposed to even a cent being taken or spent by any government local or fed.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by TheCoffinman


Pure political strategy, they cut the domestic spending because it directly affects the voting public in many ways... Internally they can blame the right for blocking efforts to raise revenues for domestic spending and agendas "Which would have improved the economy" ... Lies and more...

If the democratic party fails and loses in future elections, it will be up to the republicans to increase domestic spending to satisfy the voters, and raise taxes to pay for it ... Then they get to be the bad guys again... and history repeats itself again... and again... and again.

He wants to target people on medicaid and such who are barely surving yet still has tons of dough for wars,the D.E.A. and of course Foreign handouts.My government makes me want to vomit.Always stealing from the poor and working poor.

U.S. President Barack Obama, under pressure from deficit hawks, will seek a three-year freeze on domestic spending in his 2011 budget that would save $250 billion by 2020.

(whoopty damn doo, by then im sure our debt will be nearing 20 trillion if the united states is even united still)

"This is like announcing you're going on a diet after winning a pie-eating contest," said Michael Steel, spokesman for House of Representatives Republican leader John Boehner.

(like that boner has reason to talk sh*t about spending)

The 2010 budget allocated $447 billion to non-security discretionary spending, or about one eight of the overall budget. Agencies that could feel the pinch include the Commerce, Interior, Justice and Labor departments, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency. The United States ran a record $1.4 trillion budget deficit in fiscal year 2009

(so that means next years budget deficiet will only be 1.2 trillion, what a bunch of morons)

so in the meantime all these domestic programs have to suffer.... great plan you elitist trash..

www.reuters.com...


[edit on 25-1-2010 by TheCoffinman]

I'm trying to understand... money for military, Homeland security and intelligence will remain the same. Medicare /Medicaid?

No money for parks? What else?

reply to post by TheCoffinman


And remember, a domestic spending freeze is actually a spending cut... and again, it is simply a political move.

A desperate, but brilliant one.

Read my previous post and you'll get an idea of why, and where this will likely go from here.

Originally posted by Walkswithfish
reply to post by TheCoffinman

 

Pure political strategy, they cut the domestic spending because it directly affects the voting public in many ways... Internally they can blame the right for blocking efforts to raise revenues for domestic spending and agendas "Which would have improved the economy" ... Lies and more...

If the democratic party fails and loses in future elections, it will be up to the republicans to increase domestic spending to satisfy the voters, and raise taxes to pay for it ... Then they get to be the bad guys again... and history repeats itself again... and again... and again.

Sorry bud, I think you have that equation backwards as we have seen several examples this year... add to a piece of legislation and cry "socialist legislation" before the ink dries. Or kill the economy so thoroughly that god could not resuscitate such a death, then bash the next person for failing to pull off the miracle.

Brilliant is right

"I learned it from watching you"

reply to post by Janky Red


Politics at its worst and at its best... No matter how you look at it.

It is we the people who always lose when they play these games.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
It doesn't make any difference anyway. Anybody else see that number on Drudge? Is that 12 quadrillion? It's over.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

No, trillion, count the comma's.

Seriously, Obama just can't win with you guys, can he?

Republicans: "You're spending too much!"

Obama: "We'll stop spending on everything but national security, defense and veterans."

Republicans: "You're still spending too much!"

Theoretical Obama reply: "We'll...stop spending on everything?"

Theoretical republican reply: "You hate America by not providing us sufficient national security and not taking care of our veterans!"

Then of course, those calling it a political move must have ignored or not seen this recent quote:

I'd rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president.