Does the TEA party know what the actual budget cuts were yet?

U.S. Budget Analysis Shows Smaller Savings .

WASHINGTON—A new analysis by the Congressional Budget Office suggests that the 2011 spending deal struck by Republicans and Democrats late Friday would save only about $352 million this year, a small fraction of the $38.5 billion touted by negotiators on both sides.

Wow, quite a little leap there. The last time I believe it was with renewing the patriot act. The TEA party candidates failed to stand with their people. Now I know the TEA party wanted some big big big cuts to happen and it seems that decimal point moved a bit there.

reply to post by Sinnthia


There is no such thing as the Tea party running the rebugnicans going on!

I am not a Tea party card carrying member but rather I'm a veteran with a chemistry degree who has been voting Libertarian. I do lean toward what the Tea Party says, at least what I have heard as opposed to what we're allowed to read or see in the lame stream media. I feel that this 'party' has already been hijacked by the "Ging-grinches" and other nutcases seen in media clips. I think deliberatly helping TPTB.

I would vote for Herman Cain. He's the leader of the pack of the black Tea baggers. In fact the rally I went to so I coud see for myself in my hometown I saw a lot of variety in skin color. I even saw legal immigrants who came to express their agreement with the principles of limited gov. I came away enlightened.

Today I can say I agree with Gov Ventura 100% on what is going on with both the R's and the D's and with him on many of his ideas. The two party's are not solving the problems. In fact they are continuing to spend someone elses money like it grows on trees while invading people who can't attack here. I want our soldiers to protect my border from al Qaeda not some poppy field in Afghanistan.

reply to post by Justoneman


I want to believe you but I feel a little worn out from the last time around. I heard all the cries about how there is no such thing as a TEA party all while people that claimed to be TEA party people had no problem telling us who they support. They have their heros in office now and the politicians that claim to represent the TEA party seem to get no backlash for using that name. Yet, these are the same people that turned their backs on the TEA party over the patriot act and now this. They cried and cried and cried about how the evil Democrats were not letting the TEA party Republicans make necessary cuts to make America better. The whole time, those same TEA party Republicans were really only after about 1% of the budget and managed to get away with claiming a victory of sorts in getting at what amounts to 1% of that 1%.

I heard all this "Not my guy" and "There is no TEA Party...." stuff before. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice....uh....can't get fooled again is what I am saying.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
U.S. Budget Analysis Shows Smaller Savings .

WASHINGTON—A new analysis by the Congressional Budget Office suggests that the 2011 spending deal struck by Republicans and Democrats late Friday would save only about $352 million this year, a small fraction of the $38.5 billion touted by negotiators on both sides.

Wow, quite a little leap there. The last time I believe it was with renewing the patriot act. The TEA party candidates failed to stand with their people. Now I know the TEA party wanted some big big big cuts to happen and it seems that decimal point moved a bit there.

Last time I checked, members of the Tea Party like Bachmann voted against this so-called budget "compromise". The fact that even that compromise now looks like a sham makes the Tea Party members that voted against it look like the real intelligent people here.

Check out this thread for further discussion of this issue.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Last time I checked, members of the Tea Party like Bachmann voted against this so-called budget "compromise".

Seems you missed the point here. What was Bachmann going for again? 1%. You can go on and on about he she did not like this compromise but you cannot show me where she proposed any more signifigant cuts, can you?

The fact that even that compromise now looks like a sham makes the Tea Party members that voted against it look like the real intelligent people here.

Not really because what you seem to be trying quite hard to miss is that even if the TEA Party members got what they were asking for, it was 1% of the total budget. The fact that they had to settle for 1% of that hardly makes their 1% any more signifigant than it actually is.

Check out this ...

Yeah I would probably have done that had it not crossed my path in what comes across like email spam in a short "yeah but...follow my link." Sorry but I find it rather pointless to take this discussion over to your thread. But hey, you go there and wait for me, k?

Originally posted by Sinnthia
Seems you missed the point here. What was Bachmann going for again? 1%. You can go on and on about he she did not like this compromise but you cannot show me where she proposed any more signifigant cuts, can you?

Alas (for you), I can.

source

Rep. Michele Bachmann has outlined an estimated $423 billion in potential federal budget cuts that, on the surface, seem simple, but in practice serve as an object lesson in how tough it’ll be for Congress to make any meaningful budget cuts over the next few years.

Her proposed cuts are over 10 times what was agreed on in the compromise.

reply to post by Sinnthia


Yeah, I saw it. Am disappointed. There is only one chance left for redemption. And it is the 2012 budget. The 2011 budget was a feint that the dems did to lay political blame for the up-coming elections. THEY wanted this issue.

Again, I'm an independent. NOT a republican. Bush kinda blew that one for me.

reply to post by Sinnthia


How about Paul Ryan's Plan?

He is proposing some major cuts, and he is acknowledging the difficulty, but also the necessity.

Or here is a fellow Tea Partier of mine, also an economist, teacher, and fellow ATSer.
Modern Sense -- U.S. Fiscal Policy and Debt Limit
It only slightly touches on the Budget, but it goes into more detail about the proposed filibuster the Tea Party stands to use if they try to raise the debt ceiling again.

The sad fact is, YES, the Tea Party did get hijacked and steamrollered by the GOP and Fox News. Their ideals were widely mis-communicated, and the nationwide impression of the Tea Party does not match what you could find in your local town. Also, many of the elected Republicans were just riding the wave, and they didn't have any intention of radically altering the politics as usual.

It was a baby step. An important one, because it might stave off some major protests/revolts/riots for a little while. Either the political process works, and something like the Tea Party can make a difference, or the political process is broken, and the necessary change will have to come about by other means. I am praying for the Tea Party approach, but I'll support whatever is necessary to get a handle on things before it is too late.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Her proposed cuts are over 10 times what was agreed on in the compromise.

Wow. Her proposed cuts were over 10 times 1%!!!! I stand corrected then. I asked for you to show me signifigant cuts but I never expected anything as high as 10%. I feel like such an idiot now.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by centurion1211

Her proposed cuts are over 10 times what was agreed on in the compromise.

Wow. Her proposed cuts were over 10 times 1%!!!! I stand corrected then. I asked for you to show me signifigant cuts but I never expected anything as high as 10%. I feel like such an idiot now.

edit on 14-4-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

Actually you said "meaningful" and not "significant" cuts.

I - and apparently many others - happen to think what Bachmann proposed fits both categories.

And don't forget that democrats only wanted to cut $6 billion.

Originally posted by getreadyalready

How about Paul Ryan's Plan?

Before I engage you, I'd like to confirm you're not at a pool party and have been drinking.

Hmmmmmm, let's take a look.

Critics say Ryan's plan won't help to lighten the debt load. Indeed, it would actually increase the federal debt from $15 trillion to $23.1 trillion.

"Republicans want to spend $40 trillion over 10 years. That averages a staggering $4 trillion per year. As recently as 2000, federal spending was only about $1.8 trillion," Benedict said from his Washington, D.C., office.

SOURCE

And how's that TEA PARTY fiscal conservatism working fer ya?

(CNSNews.com) - The federal government has already borrowed an additional $803.73 per each household in the United States since the Republican House majority elected last November enacted its first law governing federal spending.

On March 2, the day that first Republican-approved CR became law, the national debt was $14.1785 trillion ($14,178,525,108,267.60), according to the Bureau of the Public Debt. As of now, the national debt is $14.2729 trillion ($14,272,993,603,617.44).

That means the debt has increased $94.5 billion ($94,468,495,349.84) since the Republican-controlled House gained constitutional control of the federal purse strings.

www.cnsnews.com...

Hat tip to mnemeth1 for accidently turning me on to this CONSERVATIVE source.

reply to post by kinda kurious


Ha! No partying yet today!

I admit Ryan's plan is not perfect, but it is the most aggressive one out there. The problem is too much compromising, pandering, and politcking.

We need these Tea Party folks to be the radicals they were accused of being. We need them to stand pat on issues and force the compromise to come to them.

The scary fact is, eventually nature will take its course. We can take drastic measures now, or we can continue pissing on the wildfire until it overtakes us. The economy is going to reset itself one way or another. The government is going to get reset one way or another. i prefer it to be by calculated, and stern actions, but if we continue pandering and compromising instead of acting, then eventually things will fall apart and happen on their own terms.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
I admit Ryan's plan is not perfect, but it is the most aggressive one out there.

Well then I hope you won't be too upset when it arrives DOA in Senate:

The measure is certain to die in the Senate where Democratic leaders have endorsed President Barack Obama’s competing call to reduce the deficit through a combination of tax increases and spending cuts.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
The problem is too much compromising, pandering, and politcking.

Well if you ask me, too much pandering to the wealthy and corporate fat cats:

It would also cut the top corporate and individual tax rates from 35 percent to 25 percent. The plan wouldn’t balance the government’s books until 2040.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
We need these Tea Party folks to be the radicals they were accused of being.

Odd then that the Tea Party's poster boy Pon Paul thumbed down on the vote. Symbolic posturing?, cuts not deep enough?, too much grease for the corporation?--you tell me .

No Democrats voted today for Ryan’s plan while four Republicans opposed it: Representatives Denny Rehberg of Montana, David McKinley of West Virginia, Walter Jones of North Carolina and Ron Paul of Texas.

[my bold for emphasis]

BLOOMBERG NEWS LINK TO ALL EXTERNAL QUOTES

If the Republicans and their bully buddies in the TEA PARTY were actually SERIOUS about financial reform and the "Path to Prosperity" why does it continue to pander to the rich and pamper corporations with lavish tax cuts and loopholes thereby depriving the much needed tax revenue to our teetering nation? I'm just...kurious.

This nation was built upon a premise of compromise something the Baggers clearly do not an fail to understand, compromise on the left only and none from them is not compromise, that is a dictatorship.

The fact remains they threw the nation under the bus when it came to reauthourization of PATRIOT and that alone tells me who they are working for, a wing of TPTB and nothing more.

They went for continuing the tax breaks for the top 2% of earners because a clearcut majority of them come from this group. I guess cutting social programs is more important to them then keeping our fortress afloat.

Their true colours have now been shown, the cloak is off.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by kinda kurious

 

Ha! No partying yet today!

I admit Ryan's plan is not perfect, but it is the most aggressive one out there. The problem is too much compromising, pandering, and politcking.

We need these Tea Party folks to be the radicals they were accused of being. We need them to stand pat on issues and force the compromise to come to them.

The scary fact is, eventually nature will take its course. We can take drastic measures now, or we can continue pissing on the wildfire until it overtakes us. The economy is going to reset itself one way or another. The government is going to get reset one way or another. i prefer it to be by calculated, and stern actions, but if we continue pandering and compromising instead of acting, then eventually things will fall apart and happen on their own terms.

That is seriously what I think the purpose of them is, to delay the recovery long enough and do nothing about it just so that they can say that the left did nothing while they did the same exact thing, nothing. Attempting to score brownie and political points on the back of this nation is sickening.

Birthers caught shredding The Constitution using the Arizona birther law.
Article IV Section I titled Each State to Honor all Other states the following :
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

IE,

No state has the authourity to usurp another.

More proof of racism :
Nearly half of all Republicans in Mississippi want to ban interracial marriage.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

How about Paul Ryan's Plan?

I thought you had said you were a TEA party guy? This is where I get confused. TEA party candidates love the Ryan plan but not TEA party grandfather Ron Paul. The TEA party were the same people concerned about fiscal responsibility and damage to medicare and social security. Now they support a plan that gives tax money to rich folks and damages those programs. So what does being a TEA party person really mean in light of this Ryan plan?

He is proposing some major cuts, and he is acknowledging the difficulty, but also the necessity.

He is proposing some major tax cuts and that is the first place he loses me. Acknowledging the difficulty and then lowering your revenue stream seems a little counterintuitive to me.

I do not understand the tax cutting bit at all. Bush cut taxes for the richest because this Heritage foundation BS promised those tax cuts would somehow magically produce jobs. I understand that people disagree on whether or not that works but it has been 10 years now and we know exactly what that does. So when the same Heritage foundatino claptrap comes out packaged as the Ryan plan and offers greater tax cuts I want to bash my head into a wall.

Then there is the huge flag of "WE LIED TO YOU AND YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO SEE IT" waving over the entire thing. The EXACT same people, this TEA party bunch of politicos ran aroud the country trying to scare people away from HCR because they claimed it was going to destroy Medicare. It was repeated so much I heard it in my sleep. While Obama's original proposal was supposed to actually tackle the huge cost of medical care in this country, people were told to just reject it because it was going to destroy medicare. These are the same people now calling the Ryan plan responsible and brave in that it is willing to destroy Medicare because something has to be done.

I have a huge problem with anyone that tells me that to stand with them will save me from being pissed on only so they can then turn around and piss on me and tell me why I need them to do it. So you got one big lie and more tax cuts on top of tax cuts in order to make us and save us more money. I have a feeling I have barely scratched the surface of this though.

I will have to check out your other link still and get back to that.

Like I said earlier, ryans plan is not perfect, but, in my opinion it is the best thing on the table at this time. I would love to see an even more aggressive plan! I would love to see a "flat tax" or the so-called "fair tax" or even a "consumption/sales tax."

The current system is ridiculous. It needs a drastic overhaul. We shouldn't have anybody, rich or poor, that is not paying taxes, and we shouldn't be penalizing people who are more or less successful than others.

Ron paul has some very, very good ideas, but somehow he loses support. He always seems to be on the fringe. He can't even keep the tea party united behind him. I wish he were a better politician, but at this stage, I am willing to take someone with less constitutional savvy and more political savvy! We have to start somewhere and get something done, and build on that.

Or.......we can always scrap the political illusion and go confederate style?

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Or here is a fellow Tea Partier of mine, also an economist, teacher, and fellow ATSer.
Modern Sense -- U.S. Fiscal Policy and Debt Limit
It only slightly touches on the Budget, but it goes into more detail about the proposed filibuster the Tea Party stands to use if they try to raise the debt ceiling again.

I had some time to read this over finally and It was a little hard getting past the opening Bush apology/excuse. It really seems like an odd way to present our prosperous future by repeating that it was not Bush's fault we got in this mess. Then the logic it uses to excuse what was Bush's fault really kind of does it in for me. As it goes on to say that during his presidency, things got so bad in part because of things he could never have imagined like 9/11. Well, I have news for this economist. 9/11 did not really cost the US that much money. Our RESPONSE to it is what has been bleeding us dry and that was indeed Bush's doing. Call it a fault or not, any essay that wants to go from Clinton to Obama and pretend Bush just passed through while some crazy stuff went down is nonsense. For that, it certainly fails to address the economic impact of Clinton era Tax rates vs. the now infamous Bush tax cuts. Then it seems to take off from the jumping point so that one fails for me too.

The sad fact is, YES, the Tea Party did get hijacked and steamrollered by the GOP and Fox News. Their ideals were widely mis-communicated, and the nationwide impression of the Tea Party does not match what you could find in your local town. Also, many of the elected Republicans were just riding the wave, and they didn't have any intention of radically altering the politics as usual.

I honestly do not know how to take this when I see it. I see people say they support these Republicans (Ryan plan cough cough) and that they are TEA party people, acknowledge the TEA party was hijacked by those same Republicans. That sounds very Stockholm Syndromey to me. Does it make sense when you hear it the way I see it?

It was a baby step. An important one, because it might stave off some major protests/revolts/riots for a little while. Either the political process works, and something like the Tea Party can make a difference, or the political process is broken, and the necessary change will have to come about by other means. I am praying for the Tea Party approach, but I'll support whatever is necessary to get a handle on things before it is too late.

The TEA party claims to be all concerned for "we the people" right? The TEA party is not a majority of the people in this country. You just explained how they are going to either filibuster or protest louder later if they do not get their way. What happened to "we?"

Originally posted by getreadyalready
Like I said earlier, ryans plan is not perfect, but, in my opinion it is the best thing on the table at this time. I would love to see an even more aggressive plan! I would love to see a "flat tax" or the so-called "fair tax" or even a "consumption/sales tax."

I cannot get on that bus. That sounds a lot to me like "We know you have been poisoned and that our plan to amputate your legs is not perfect, per se, but it is the best thing we got on the table at this time."

In the greatest country in the world, I refuse to settle for the "best we got at this time." We can do better. We have done better.

The current system is ridiculous. It needs a drastic overhaul. We shouldn't have anybody, rich or poor, that is not paying taxes, and we shouldn't be penalizing people who are more or less successful than others.

I absolutely agree. So how is it that so many people can agree that the tax code is unfair and then part ways like us in that you think $3Trillion in lost tax revenue is ok, as long as we cut programs for the poor where as I think, lets hold on to that $3Trillion instead of giving it away and start from there.

Ron paul has some very, very good ideas, but somehow he loses support. He always seems to be on the fringe. He can't even keep the tea party united behind him. I wish he were a better politician, but at this stage, I am willing to take someone with less constitutional savvy and more political savvy! We have to start somewhere and get something done, and build on that.

Ron Paul does have some great ideas. Unfortunately he also has some really bad ideas. I really have no opinion on him because that seems like wasted effort at this point.

Or.......we can always scrap the political illusion and go confederate style?

Is that what you hope for your children and grandchildren's futures to be like?

reply to post by Sinnthia


I'm going to answer a little bit out of order, but here goes.

Is that what you hope for your children and grandchildren's futures to be like?

The short answer is no. But, I also do not want my children and grand-children to allow the continual sliding and erosion of their individual rights. This country is drastically different, in a worse way, than the country my grand-parents lived in and envisioned for the future. So, while I hope my children can live a better lifestyle than I have lived, I also hope they are not willing to sacrifice their liberties for it. I hope they are at least "willing" to make the hard sacrifice for the greater good.

So how is it that so many people can agree that the tax code is unfair and then part ways like us in that you think $3Trillion in lost tax revenue is ok, as long as we cut programs for the poor where as I think, lets hold on to that $3Trillion instead of giving it away and start from there.

My answer to this one and many of the other questions will be almost the same thing. I can totally get on board with a plan that delays the tax cuts, and still makes deep cuts in spending. I just haven't seen that plan. For all the criticism the Tea Party is taking, at least they are active. Show me an aggressive plan that balances the budget in 5 years and I'll support it! Obama has some good ideas too! Remove the loopholes, remove the limits on Social Security contribution, get rid of the tax cuts for the rich and the loopholes for the corporations. Ease the restrictions on foreign earned investments, so that corporations can bring their money back to the states. BUT, do it along with major spending cuts. I'd be happy to support a plan that incorporated the most aggressive parts of each side! I have a feeling, we will get the exact opposite. We will probably get a plan that incorporates the least aggressive parts of each side, and that will just be another failing plan.

In the greatest country in the world, I refuse to settle for the "best we got at this time." We can do better. We have done better.

That is easy to say. I would love to say the same thing, but what is your solution then? Do we refuse to vote? Do we write letters? Talk to the press? Run for an office? I mean really nobody cares what we refuse to settle for. The government is so disconnected from the people that it is worthless to bluster and blow and stomp our feet, because they just don't care. The corporations will still finance their campaign, and someone will still get elected and play the same game.

So, back to my confederacy statement, or supporting the imperfect Tea Party and using it as a baby step. Unless you have a better plan that will be more effective, then I am all ears.

The TEA party claims to be all concerned for "we the people" right? The TEA party is not a majority of the people in this country. You just explained how they are going to either filibuster or protest louder later if they do not get their way. What happened to "we?"

Pretty much the same as above. At least the Tea Party is "active" and at least they are not supporting the status quo. We need radical changes, and we need them quickly. You may not think the Tea Party is the majority, but I think you are wrong. I think the vast, silent "majority" is busy working in rural America, and busy working the graveyard shifts and the factories in the cities, and I think their views are not out in the open. Their views are ignored by the polls, because they don't bother answering the polls. Their views are ignored by the politicians, because they are not writing letters or going to rallies, because they are too busy scraping to get by. I think the Tea Party is speaking for those people. At least I hope that is what is going on. If the big money GOP continues to hijack the coattails of the Tea Party, then it is all a wasted effort.

As in all my responses, show me a better, more immediate, more efficient plan, and I will support it!