Breaking: Sources: Tentative debt deal calls for up to $2.8T in savings

Just a while ago on CNN, this is isnt good.

Link to the news
anyone have any thoughts on this?

CNN Breaking

I expect more fighting back and forth and then something passes in the last hours.

It's all about the spotlight and brownie points.

reply to post by jam321


I'm glad I'm not the only one
I've been feeling for a while that they're just putting on a show for the masses.

I'm more worried about why they're trying to distract us, than the actual debt issues.

I dont see much in what this guy has to say. Basically its what they have been saying and doing the entire time. That they are close to a deal and they got the right people working together to get the negotiation figured out. Nothing more than words to try and calm the public.

obama's original plan was for 4 billion over ten years. three trillion in cuts, one trillion in taxes. even with that, our debt will increase over those 10 years, not lessen.

it would be better to not raise the debt ceiling. its our only hope now.

Just how much is all this infighting costing the taxpayers,americans have become a bunch of witless,arrogant,cowards.

Originally posted by jam321
I expect more fighting back and forth and then something passes in the last hours.

It's all about the spotlight and brownie points.

I couldn't agree more. Something to keep the sheeple on their toes. I'll also bet that MSM is covering this like a hawk, and of course sheeple get glued to the TV, so......

It's all just showboating. If the government shuts down, they don't get paid. They wouldn't let that happen.

reply to post by Forevever


The 'distraction' is that neither party are offering any REAL cuts to spending, namely from the Defense budget, or any of their precious pork barrel spending in their districts. To be fair, though, they have threatened to gut social security and take food from the mouths of the poorest of the poor. How noble of them!

Nope, just lots of inconsequential posturing about the debt ceiling that never actually gets around to talking about how and what we will have to cut, and why.

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
obama's original plan was for 4 billion over ten years. three trillion in cuts, one trillion in taxes. even with that, our debt will increase over those 10 years, not lessen.

it would be better to not raise the debt ceiling. its our only hope now.

How would that be 'better'? It wouldn't cut spending. It would just send the entire nation into default. Which, despite what you armchair zombie Apocalypse types might want to believe, would NOT be good for the average America.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


Well I'd have to agree with Bob. It's hurt now or hurt later. Seriously. Our kids shouldn't have to be the bearers of all this rising debt.

But, I also think it's all a sham anyway. Threatening to cut basics, but allowing giant corporations to profit by billions a year and not pay a good share of taxes on that is just plain wrong. The American way would be fair tax law across the board.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


we've defaulted once before, and nothing bad happened. if we don't totally get rid of the deficit, then the debt ceiling shouldn't be raised.

congress won't go far enough. neither side is willing to pass a bill with big enough cuts, and high enough taxes. hitting the debt ceiling would force the government to make meaningful cuts and raise taxes.

how does a 2.8 trillion cut help us when we will break 22 trillion after the 10 years is up? we wouldn't ever be able to pay that down.

reply to post by SunnyDee


don't believe the hype, Friend. Not raising the debt ceiling WILL NOT address spending. IT is a distraction AWAY from addressing spending. When the 'tea party' demands an end to all these wasteful wars, then I will believe they care about the debt and the Constitution.

Does this mean China is now the worlds economic SuperPower?

All plans presented so far have been nothing but male cow feces. They claim to cut but all cuts are after projected increses so the deficit and the debt will continue to increase even with the "draconian" Republican plans. The only hope is a refusal to raise the debt ceiling which will force the government only to spend what it takes in. Is it gonna suck? You bet. Wouldn't of sucked as bad if it was let happen in 2008-9 and even less if it had been allowed to happen after 2000 tech wreck. The rot at the core of our economic system and government can no longer be patched over with government spending.

Put all the political theater aside and remember who caused this. Politicians who signed one way free trade agreements, Wall Street that forced companies to seek higher profits by outsourcing labor, low interest from the Fed that encouraged bubbles and discouraged saving, illegal immigrants who depressed wages of the jobs that did remain here, and lets not forget 3 public wars and God knows how many less public.

I predict that both sides will try to distract us with social issues. Like gay marriage, abortion, gun control, and other important but not financially important issues after they get some deal passed. This is THE ISSUE for the next election cycle.People are finally coming to realize that the governments debt will be paid by their children and grandchildren. I'm glad that we hit this wall before all the boomers retired. There would be no hope of any solution if they were the main beneficiary of entitlement spending.

I'm glad to see the Tea Party return to it's fiscal roots and get away from the social conservative issues that drove a lot of socially liberal but fiscally conservative folks away (there were a lot of those at the beginning but they lost clout with the co-opting by establishment GOP). I hope they can keep focus there because that is where they cam retain their power.

If they cut spending and not raise the debt ceiling would be a better plan.
Get us out of these wars is a great money saver. How much is the debacle in Libya costing the tax payeres?

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


Not quite sure I understand you. When we default, spending will definitely be addressed. Might not be addressed the way the everyday man would want, but it will force spending decisions. The difference between you and me, I guess, is those numbers are real to me, I respect that we will have to pay them down at some point, where you seem to think it will all work itself out in some future scenario. (which if could, if we start now!)

reply to post by SunnyDee


I agree that we shouldn't stick our kids with the bill, that's why I am FOR reversing the Bush tax cuts. They attempted a kind of social engineering, using Reagan era economic theory which no longer applies. Ergo -- Trickle down doesn't work in an era of globalization, NAFTA and CAFTA. Proof? 2 "jobless recoveries" since the Bush Tax cuts were implemented. Before Iraq / Afghanistan, and prior to the Bush tax cuts, we were on a path of projected budget surplus. Reverse both factors, and shrink the debt.

Cutting from the bottom will only turn a bad situation worse, as all of the juice in our economy today is spent at ground level.

Remove NAFTA and CAFTA, reform so called "Free Trade" to a more equitable trade between the US worker and the workers of our trading partners, unhook "soft money" from the political / electoral process, and we can talk about tax cuts for the wealthy. Until then -- its pissing down a hole.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


Totally agree, but really nothing will be fixed with this crowd (house,senate, prez), best we will get here is a default/depression/reconstruction. Of course I don't want this, I just don't see another way.

Originally posted by SunnyDee
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

Not quite sure I understand you. When we default, spending will definitely be addressed. Might not be addressed the way the everyday man would want, but it will force spending decisions. The difference between you and me, I guess, is those numbers are real to me, I respect that we will have to pay them down at some point, where you seem to think it will all work itself out in some future scenario. (which if could, if we start now!)

I never even began to imply I think they will be 'worked out in the future'.

My point is that the debate about raising the debt ceiling is NOT addressing spending. Spending could have been addressed MONTHS ago. IT wasn't. This is political theater. A DISTRACTION from talking about spending. All this would do, if the debt ceiling isnt passed, is cause an economic catastrophe to trump the 2008 collapse.

IF EITHER party wanted to cut spending, they woudn't have done that A LONG time ago. Bu they both know they don't have to if they keep you distracted with this nonsense about not raising the debt ceiling.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


Well it's not just raising the debt ceiling that is the 2 parties disagreement. They are talking cap, cut, and balance as well, so spending cuts, taxes, and the debt ceiling are on the table. You are probably right, it's all a distraction, but it's still a real problem.

I don't raise my debt ceiling in my house unless I get a substantial raise.