House passes GOP debt measure; Obama praises compromise plan

For anyone that's interested, here's the bill that was passed:
H.R.2560 - Cut, Cap, and Balance Act of 2011

OpenCongress Summary
Ties an increase in the federal debt limit to enforceable spending targets that would make deep cuts in non-Defense discretionary spending while allowing the military budget to continue to increase. It would also require passage of a constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment calling for the federal budget to deficit-neutral each year with total spending at no more than 18% of GDP, a historically low level. The amendment would require a 2/3rds majority for any revenue increases and would only allow an exception the deficit-neutral requirement in times of war.

reply to post by neo96

people just cant wrap their heads around that constitution that says. we need to pay for a military.

Would hurt if you reread the constitution either. We are only supposed to support an army and navy also congress has a right to raise taxes during a time of war.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

reply to post by neo96


social security and medicare was running a surplus up till a year or so ago, so, well......
they've been adding to the general revenues, not taking away from them...

balance budget ammendment???

most of the time when I hear of laws and such designed to force the federal gov't into running a balance budget, there is an exception, mainly concerning wars and other emergencies....we have four or more wars going on at the moment, so, well, if that exception is included in the ammendment, it ain't gonna help, since the wars will cause it to be null and void...
and it's not a good idea to tie the hands of the gov't when a real emergency comes around...

Of course the house is going to come up with something, it's in their best interests if they want into the White House. Of course, the senate is going to stalemate it, find some loophole, meanwhile the deadline for the debt-ceiling is just around the corner. People will get nervous, awaiting a govt. default, which will not happen, it's just smoke-and-mirrors because they WILL pass SOMETHING in time. This is their job, people, a lot of posturing while acting like they are doing something worth their 80k a year jobs. I'm disgusted. It's sickening.

And so it goes on.....

Isn't this 4 trillion dollar over 10 years cut coming out of the 10 trillion or so spending budget Obama had? So they cut 4 out of the 10 still leaves 6 trillion. I think they need to go even deeper and not raise the debt ceiling.

I read the "gang of 6" compromise was too complicated to get worked out before August 2nd so:

If they agree to work out the GOS budget and Obama implements a stop gap increase in debt ceiling, how much will it be for?

The news is reporting that the democratic compromise contains cuts to military and entitlements but its vague.
Anyone have a specific list of cuts, caps, and changes that are written into the gang of six compromise?

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
Neo, that is just plain incorrect. Defense spending in the US FARRRRRRR surpasses ANY other spending. But thanks for showing your true colors in defense of a bloated military budget.

No, the facts don't bear that out. Medicare/ Medicaid is the largest expenditure at 822 billion. Social Security is next at 715 billion. Defense/ wars is number 3 at 701 billion. It's a significant number to be sure and it should be on the chopping block along with the other programs, but to say that it "far surpasses any other spending" is not accurate.

Originally posted by SmokeandShadow
So...they will cut 3.7 trillion, but how much will be spent in 10 years? We can't have growth as we have in the past, it is coming down one way or another. This way of living isn't sustainable environmentally anyway.

Right, and not just that, but how are those "cuts" distributed? Because if it's like every other government "fix", it's probably 9 years of bloated spending with the last (10th) year containing all of the proposed "cuts". Of course by then it's a new group in office that has no interest in implementing cuts imposed on them from 9 years ago, so they just vote to ignore them. It's standard MO for our government- push the problems off to someone else. That's why we're in the pile of doo we're in right now.

reply to post by SavedOne


our numbers for military expenditures is artificially low. The number you are citing is a low estimate that does not take into account NUMEROUS long-term aspects of war. This total brings the number well past social security and medicare, and is the US' biggest expendature.

BESIDES< people have paid INTO SS and Medicaire. These wars do not serve us at all.

IF they want to cut they can cut military. Everything else is Bull#

Originally posted by Sundowner

Originally posted by Misoir
Source

The U.S. House on Tuesday night passed the "cut, cap and balance" deficit reduction plan backed by tea party conservatives but dismissed by President Barack Obama, who offered strong praise for another proposal put together by a bipartisan group of senators.

The so-called Gang of Six plan -- drafted by three Democratic and three Republican senators -- presents a possible compromise to Obama and congressional leaders as they approach a deadline for a deal on cutting federal deficits in order to gain Republican support for raising the federal debt ceiling to avoid an unprecedented default.

It would cut the nation's debt by about $3.7 trillion over the next 10 years -- similar to the president's call for roughly $4 trillion in savings.

The Republicans in the US House of Representatives managed to pass the “Cut, Cap, and Balance” legislation with 234 votes, 5 of which had come from Democrats and 9 Republicans voted against it. We all know it will never pass in the US Senate because it is run by the Democrats (53-47) and Obama has already promised to veto this legislation should it come to his desk.

But this is important legislation nonetheless. It is, without argument, one of the most hard-right economic proposals in our lifetimes. With enormous cuts and a balanced budget amendment (if I am correct). This also cuts into Medicare, Medicaid, social security, educational, health care, and much more.

You know what's really ironic? The "3.7 Trillion over the next 10 years" part. It's a load of crap. That's a pittance. It's a drop in the bucket. Nada. Nothing. With our nation 14 trillion in debt, does anyone really think cutting that over the next 10 years (the 3.7 number) will make ANY difference? We're in big trouble people. I am beginning to feel like what our "lawmakers" are doing is child's play...like building a toothpick dam against a raging river.

And, to make matters even worse the "gang of six" plan seeks to eliminate home mortgage, IRA, charitable deduction and health insurance premium deductions. Talk about sticking it to the aveage working family all under the guise of punishing the fabled super rich. The super rich won't be punished (nor should they) they have accountants and lawyers for that.

America...wake up please...we have a Marxist in the White House and spineless unpincipled "representation" in Congress.

Originally posted by robyn


And, to make matters even worse the "gang of six" plan seeks to eliminate home mortgage, IRA, charitable deduction and health insurance premium deductions. Talk about sticking it to the aveage working family all under the guise of punishing the fabled super rich. The super rich won't be punished (nor should they) they have accountants and lawyers for that.

So, you dont approve of taxing the middle class, and you dont approve of taxing the 'super rich'.

So you dont approve of any taxes at all?

reply to post by SavedOne


medicare has it's own tax, along with social security, which up till now has had more revenue going into it, than what was taken out!! drop medicare, and well, then can we also drop the social security tax and see 800 billion in savings, heck no!!

and medicare/medicaid wouldn't be costing so much if we didn't have such a screwed up healthcare system!!!

medicare and medicaid shouldn't even be put into the same category...
one is for seniors, who have paid that social security tax most of their lives and it's there for when they retire, the other is for the oh, I don't want to work, I think I'll just pop another baby out, and the "Oh, I shouldn't have to pay child support!!" crowd!!!

reply to post by incrediblelousminds



I don't approve of the current tax structure (ie progressive tax). Tax reform such as a Fair Tax is more preferable.

The FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue neutrality, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment.

The FairTax Act (HR 25, S 13) is nonpartisan legislation. It abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities.

www.fairtax.org...

I also support federal government being limited to its constitutionally based powers.

"Principles:

We are a Federalist Republic not a Democracy.
State and Federal Governments are Co-Equal and Co-Sovereign.
Governments should be feared not trusted.
Governments do not exist to solve all problems.
People, not Governments, are responsible for taking care of themselves.
The powers of the Federal Government are defined and limited by the Constitution.
The 9th and 10th Amendments"

(from limitedgovernment.com...)

Caps on campaign spending, not giving big corporations the same legal rights afforded individuals, and a free and unbiased media would also help tremendously.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Misoir

 

Now though, democrats hold the blame. If the senate votes against this or the president vetos' this then it'll be democrats who caused this self-made "armageddon".
A solution was offered, no matter how distasteful to the political parties. The solution was rejected. By democrats.

Actually very crafty on the part of the Tea Party members of the House.

Cut, Cap & Balance shut down by Harry Reid and his big government buddies 51-46.
------------
Maybe the House could repackage it as a new bill and send it to the U.S. Senate.
Make a few changes. Call it Cut, Cap,Balance & Raise the Debt Ceiling.
-----------
In the mean time we got some comic relief from Contessa Brewer MSNBC.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012


Cut, Cap & Balance shut down by Harry Reid and his big government buddies 51-46.

I'm curious; why are you under the impression the Republicans are against 'big government'?

You ARE aware that Republicans are as supportive of it as Dems, right? They just like it in different ways.

reply to post by robyn


but you just previously said you dont support taxing anyone.

reply to post by robyn


does it tax the money changing hands on wall street?? or the payment of services given by the investment bankers??

the poor and much of the middle class spend most of their money on things that would be easily taxed.....shelter, food, gas, ect.....
the super wealthy don't spend the majority of their money, they "invest" to put it another way, gamble on weather or not the rest of us will pay our bills this month!!!


newt's Contract with America had a promise in it that they would balance the budget.....unless of course, there was a national emergency, like, oh, I don't know....
A WAR!!!
Clinton and the republican controlled congress did their best to get that budget balanced, and there was an improvement....
but then well, clinton was out, and the republicans got the presidency, the house, and the senate....
the promise was kept, I guess.....
but the balanced budgets were shot out the window!! they just started a war, and then they started another for good measure, now we have, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan........and well, probably another or two!!!

and they want a balance budget now??? of course, if there's a war, that's understandable...
We have the five wars that I listed, therefore, there would be an exception to any requirement to a balanced budget!! since it's congress's job to spend money!!! well, this is like an open invitation for the gov't to keep those wars going forever, so they can continue spending money insanely!! since if there was no wars, they'd have to restrain themselves to the revenues that they have coming in!!!

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by Eurisko2012


Cut, Cap & Balance shut down by Harry Reid and his big government buddies 51-46.

I'm curious; why are you under the impression the Republicans are against 'big government'?

You ARE aware that Republicans are as supportive of it as Dems, right? They just like it in different ways.

We need to reduce spending.
Any deal must have spending cuts up front.
--------------
Reagan got burned back in the 80s.
Tax Increases + Spending Cuts
Tax increases were immediate.....spending cuts never happened.
Speaker Boehner calls this the old - smoke and mirror - routine.

------------
Obama never wanted a deal.
That's why he spoiled the well with the last minute $400 Billion tax increase demand.
Speaker Boehner called it moving the goal posts last night.

-----------------
Stand by for the - executive presidential order - to be signed by Obama soon.
It was probably printed out 4 weeks ago!
All Obama has to do is sign it.

Raise the debt ceiling by $2.4 Trillion.
Wow! Look at that mountain of cash piled up in the backyard of the White House!
Spend - Baby - Spend !

Obama to Become 'Führer', Like Hitler Did on August 2 if Debt Deal Passes!!
larouchepac.com...

QEIII and the Fate of Mankind
larouchepac.com...

Yard Sale Time

The US government holds over 50 million acres of unused land.
This is not National Parks, Wilderness Areas, or Military Bases but just unused land that many drive by every day.

Most is forest service land or BLM land.

In the Calif desert there is over 2 million acres that could be used for solar power plants or other uses that could be sold.
At $1000 dollars a acre this would be $2,000,000,000
Plus the state of Calif could then tax the property and also make money.