It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew says Obama won't agree to more spending cuts

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said Obama won't agree to 'domestic' spending cuts and (Furthermore), Obama won't negotiate with Republicans about spending cuts to reduce the federal debt limit.

Well I guess HE told them



Treasury Secretary Jack Lew told “Fox News Sunday” that President Obama will neither sign government funding bills that slash domestic spending nor negotiate with Republicans over spending cuts to reduce the federal debt limit.

However, he would not say whether the president would veto proposals and put the responsibility on Capitol Hill.

“Congress has to do its work," Lew said.



Shift Blame Shift Blame Shift Blame.

No substance however on HOW Obama would solve the problem.

All Obama has to do is follow some logic that some Republicans might present.

Where is Obama's open door and transparent policy ?

Apparently HE wants more wild spending and a higher and higher debt.

Where WILL he get the money ?

What ELSE could it be ?

White House doubles down on vow Obama won't agree to more spending cuts
 

Related Stories
Obama: I won't 'twiddle my thumbs' waiting for GOP
 


AND
Watch out for the 'Republican' negotiators....

Lew continued by saying that Congress might actually move in the other direction by replacing sequestration’s automatic spending cuts. He specifically cited Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and John McCain (R-AZ) as possible negotiators with the White House – he said they would be meeting with White House staff to discuss other spending options. On NBC’s Meet the Press, Lew said, “What the president said - and has written to Congress is - that they cannot fix the problems created by the across-the-board cuts-- known as sequestration by cutting domestic priorities in order to fund defense. That's unacceptable…He won’t sign that.”
Treasury Secretary Lew: Read Our Lips, No New Spending Cuts
Oh Oh !!


Obama supporters, please explain His 'logic' and show us how we can solve the economic problems.

Thank You in advance.




posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen



Obama supporters, please explain His 'logic' and show us how we can solve the economic problems.



Blame game...

Expect it.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel we are all riding an insane horse toward a burning stable?

STOP voting for these Jack offs, every election vote the incumbent out, every single one of these idiots had their chance and they &(*$ us royally.

Kick them all out from the top down. Both parties have had their chance, stop voting along party lines, vote for that crazy new comer, you know the guys we see them on every ballot, those dudes that have no chance, VOTE FOR THEM.

IT couldn't be worst than these @$$ clowns.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


The truth is that the damage to the economy is already done, this means that no more spending cuts will keep Wall street safe with the QEs, as they were never even in consideration, so billions of dollars a month still will go to keep the too big to fail from collapse.

Already he craped on the working class when he left millions unemployed with the federal cuts on government workers, here in my neck of the woods the welfare town I live in that depend on the Federal workers income to support the welfare that Obama have increased in his term are feeling the pain. so the town is going backward to ease the pain impose on the federal workers slashing also salaries of city government workers while offering deals to the Federal ones on purchases
because after all somebody have to support the welfare recipients, less spending less taxes for the city.


So actually Obama is keeping the welfare happy while crapping on the hard workers that pay for that welfare.

But one thing is for sure, if we look at the waste and abuse is still very much enforced and that was never ever considered to be part of the cuts.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 


The reason for presidential candidates inability to fulfill what they promise to the voters is because our political parties are not in charge of the nation, they have not been in a long time, what they do is taking money from the private interest elite group that actually runs the nation, they are the ones screwing the hard working Americans in order to keep preserving their wealth and the profits of their associates

The shadow government is real very real and still very much in power and remember that the spying on the nation is run by private interest supposedly working under the government by contracts, is call leverage.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


Raise taxes, I mean increase patriotic revenues.




posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


You just make laugh so hard I am still hurting,
another crapping on the Working class with Obamacare taxes already hitting home and with salaries cuts increasing on "patriotic donations" to the federal government and the state (already happening now) is going to make tax payers and voters very happy.

And the welfare recipients will keep growing.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
Raise taxes, I mean increase patriotic revenues.


See? Even beezzer knows what to do. We should spend more.

Seriously.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234

Originally posted by beezzer
Raise taxes, I mean increase patriotic revenues.


See? Even beezzer knows what to do. We should spend more.

Seriously.




Knowing what they are going to propose is a far cry from endorsing it.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234

Originally posted by beezzer
Raise taxes, I mean increase patriotic revenues.


See? Even beezzer knows what to do. We should spend more.

Seriously.


Spend more ?

On who and what ?

Can you list the pros and cons with details ?

Sounds juicy.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


More infrastructure spending. More medicare spending. More social security spending. All the while raising the upper tax rate to 50%.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by benrl
 


The reason for presidential candidates inability to fulfill what they promise to the voters is because our political parties are not in charge of the nation, they have not been in a long time, what they do is taking money from the private interest elite group that actually runs the nation, they are the ones screwing the hard working Americans in order to keep preserving their wealth and the profits of their associates

The shadow government is real very real and still very much in power and remember that the spying on the nation is run by private interest supposedly working under the government by contracts, is call leverage.



So than by all means tell me how to fix the above.

Ill wait... Or is it just more of the process doesn't work?

Right, At least with my method if it didn't work at that point it would be more blatently obvious of the Coup that has taken place in the US since the Kennedy assassination.

A mass voting out followed by politics as usual afterward could be the straw that breaks the camels back, or would you prefer more passive do nothing attitude?



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by links234
reply to post by xuenchen
 


More infrastructure spending. More medicare spending. More social security spending. All the while raising the upper tax rate to 50%.


OOOO that all sounds soooo scrumptious !!

Does your plan have any facts and figures and how all this would be beneficial to ALL Americans ?

Who would benefit more and who would suffer more ?

How would private industry be involved and/or affected ?

How much more revenue would a 50% tax bracket bring in. Include projections for revenue declines.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Of course Obama won't agree to spending cut that gets in the way of breaking the bank.

Cloward and Piven!

Spend
Spend
Raise some taxes
Spend some more

Break da bank!



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
OOOO that all sounds soooo scrumptious !!


Doesn't it though?


Does your plan have any facts and figures and how all this would be beneficial to ALL Americans ?

A trillion dollars on infrastructure would be highly beneficial to states, localities and construction companies across the country. Preferably unionized companies, of course.


Who would benefit more and who would suffer more ?

We're really looking to make those who make more than $250,000 a year to suffer more but it turns out the more money you give poor people the more money those 1/4 millionaires make. So it's kinda tough.


How would private industry be involved and/or affected ?

The objective would be to rid the nation of "problem" employers who can't balance checkbooks but defend themselves as job creators. Really though, private industry would benefit tremendously from more money being spent and earned at the lower levels of the income bracket.


How much more revenue would a 50% tax bracket bring in. Include projections for revenue declines.


Hopefully it would come along with some changes in the tax code so we don't get larger business like GE and Exxon paying an effective rate of zero. It would likely earn the nation somewhere in the hundreds of billions of dollars. Probably start paying down the national debt within 5 years.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by links234
 


Where have you been, congress voted down the proposed spending budget for infrastructure that Obama was working on since his first term as part of his "job creation" promise, congress voted down on the first term and again in Obama second term.

It seems that congress is unwilling to vote for job creations this days.



Democratic Jobs Bill Goes Down


Senate Republicans blocked a $60 billion infrastructure bill Thursday, making the bill the second piece of President Obama’s jobs proposal to be voted down in the Senate.

Republicans and a few Democrats filibustered the broader $447 billion jobs bill last month. The vote came is a scripted floor exchange, with Democrats expected to quickly defeat an alternative GOP infrastructure funding bill. The bill garnered 51 votes--not enough to overcome the 60-vote cloture threshold.


www.nationaljournal.com...

It seems that this days our corrupted congress care more about making the rich richer, getting pay off by private interest and spying on Americans.

Job creation or fixing America is not priority and is not only Democrats but Republicans alike.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   
Here's what I fail to understand about the OP:

Since when (or How) does the Secretary of the Treasury know or influence what the PRESIDENT will or will NOT support or do???

I underdstand the rhetoric - I do NOT understand why or how this rhetoric has any credibility.
To me it's just more left-right Democrat-Republican idiotic posturing with no real substance or inherent value.

ganjoa




top topics



 
4

log in

join