Obama and Reid won't "man up" and make the difficult decision to cut entitlements. They realize the only reason they are in power is because of offering the uneducated lower class voters free food, shelter, housing, healthcare, contraceptives, abortions, cell phones, tax credits for those who pay no federal income taxes, and student loans to those who shouldn't be eligible.
We're $16 trillion in debt, which equates to over $50,000 per citizen, and under Obama it's going up over $4,000 per year per citizen. 63% of those earning less than $30,000 voted for Obama, and had only 50% of these uneducated people voted for Obama he would have lost the election by 2 million votes. Obama and Reid know that cutting spending could potentially cost them enough votes to lose next election. They don't care about the long term and how we're bankrupting the future of our kids and future generations. Their solution is always to raise revenue and not reduce costs except for military. Same thing any grade school student or teenage daughter would propose.
Or keep the entitlements and CUT foreign aid to countries that hate the USA
Why should there be homelessness and hunger in America when we have enough cash to hand over BILLIONS to countries like Libya, Egypt, Syria and some rag-tag African nations too
The Republicans have offered balanced budget amendment numerous times in the past, and are fighting for Democrats to match revenue increases with specific spending cuts.Democrats have no interest. They know their entire power base relies on buying votes. The more Americans they enslave with welfare, and the more government jobs they create, the more people they get dependent upon gov't for their livelihood who vote Democrat. Add new gov't regulations and laws, and you even get the lawyers to vote Democrat because that's how they make their money.
Some body has to be an adult and tell those riding in the wagon that there isn't enough people to pull the wagon any longer. Too many lazy, uneducated, gov't dependent citizens riding in the wagon. Obama needs to spend less time attacking the producers in society, and spend his time working on the true root cause of the problem. HIgh school drop outs, unwed mothers who's children have exponentially higher probability of being in poverty than children born to married couple (note: 40% of all children are now born to single mothers; 70% of black children); bloated gov't agencies where employees are over paid and unproductive, and too many regulations and taxes which is stifling growth. We need to stimulate growth, which means make it easier for businesses to hire and compete internationally. Obama, Reid, and Pelosi are doing the exact opposite - hence record deficits and fewer people working than when he took office 4 years ago despite all time record deficits.
Obama has been a friend to bankers! Why is he never a friend to taxpayer and cut his vacations, Michelles stay in Spain for face lift. It's in the news in Europe but all folks in news here ignore. Meanwhile the taxpayer gets soaked! What happened to Camp David for a rest!
gaol---you are the idiot---bloated is the pig named Medicaid and all the enitilemnts for so many people who least deserve them--- i say help the older generation,the widows with kids --as much as possible and as long as possible. help ot to some degree and for some time families who have fallen on hard times---but i have less sympathy for the young and able bodied---ot those who are not yet in mid twenties and have 3 to 4 kids----and this is not a make believe argument---- i see a lot of them in my practice.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Following that logic, why not deficit spend by $5 trillion a year instead of only $1 trillion? We could tell every one to just stay at home and enjoy life as Federal Reserve prints more and more money. How long would that last? We're headed in that direction now with Obama, Ried, Pelosi, and the other socialists.
We've "invested" $18 trillion in the so-called Great Society programs that liberal Democrats told us would solve poverty and create utopia, yet same amount of Americans are still in poverty, i.e. around 14%. The world has given billions and billions of dollars to poor countries, such as Haiti, and the money does nothing to stimulate their economies and create wealth because uneducated poor people don't know how to create jobs and wealth.
Obama has been running unprecedented deficits of more than $1 trillion a year, yet number of Americans in the work force is down since he took office. Primary reason unemployment is only 8% now versus 11% is because we have 10,000 Americans retiring every day and many others leaving the work force.
If Bush was playing golf in Hawaii while fiscal cliff talks had reached an impasse, and had run annual deficits of more than $1 trillion, and had lower number of Americans employed than when he took office after 4 years he would have been thrown out of office. However, the media covers for Obama, because he believes in socialism just like they do.
I saw a Revolutionary War show on the History channel a few months ago. It was interesting to see that the colonials were buying and stock piling weapons to take on the British several months before the Revolution started. Reading the news headlines over past 4 years, I wonder if we're headed for another revolution. If our founding fathers were alive today, I'm quite confident they wouldn't be Democrats. They large, bloated gov't that they warned us about, and said would threaten our freedoms is alive and well today.
But they did vote for him. Your side lost, so you don't get to dictate the policy, you get to influence. People voted for social services more in line with what the rest of the industrial world offers and for higher taxes. That is what won at the ballot.
The tide is changing. For the first time in America the majority is for these things
1. Marriage Equality
2. Legal Marijuana
3. Gun Control
4. Higher Taxes
Your side is in the minority. The problem is not outsized social programs. The problem is someone passed temporary tax cuts that we didn't have the balls to let expire as they should have. Remember when these temporary cuts were passed Greenspan said it was extremely fiscally irresponsible? He was right.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Amazing how the LIberals think until their kid runs the car over the cliff stoned out of their mind or is robbed and beaten.
But, being gay and getting married will solve all those problems, won't they? You honestly believe that some open Cross-dresser would actually defend you and your family?
Marriage equality is #1 on your list? We're a looooooong ways away from seeing 2 guys stick their tongues in each other's month or their pecker into their "partners" crevice and think that's normal. The day is coming when we're going to find out that many of the little boys adopted by 2 "married" gay men are going to be molested. Then people like you and the media will do every thing possible to cover it up. It's said to think about how many little boys are going to become victims. There's a reason why 2 men or 2 women can't pro-create. It's clearly unnatural and gay marriage is perverse.
Wow, another obtuse liberal who probably doesn't know how to balance a checkbook, let alone understand the implications of continuing on Americas unsustainable fiscal trajectory. Do you have the slightest idea what happens to this country if its debt continues to be downgraded and we have to pay 2% more on our Treasury debt? American will be Greece and all the ignorant liberals will be marching in the streets when all of the freebee government programs will have to be cut anyway. Except when it gets to that point it will be much worse for the working class in this country. I guess its hard to see the forrest for the trees through a pile of government cheese.
yep typical #$%$ thieving dem'crat party, fueling Obama's S. Side Chicago People who need more money for liquor and drugs, so can't afford to buy their own food. If the Gub'ment gives them free food and rent money then Al Sharptons have money for Drugs and to buy guns to shoot up the neighborhood.
True, but repubs failed to get the discussion to center around spending because of their extreme line on taxes. If citing spending is as important as they say, which it is, they should have given up taxes to center talks on spending.
Right now everyone knows we need to cut spending and raise revenue.
It's hard to believe that Republicans are considered the "bad guys" because they don't think taking 40% of someone's income is reasonable and appropriate. Particularly since a significant amount of these taxes will come from small business owners who create majority of the jobs in America. The 40% is in addition to 5% + state taxes, property taxes, utility taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, airport security taxes, cable taxes, phone taxes, etc etc etc.
Paying higher taxes would be more palatable if you knew the money was going to be invested in something that offered good return on investment for America. However, history has shown that virtually every gov't program never delivers what it promised, and costs exponentially more than what Congress advertised. On top of that, majority of gov't employees are UNION employees that make more in wages and benefits than their counterparts in the private sector - and are probably about 50% as productive as their counterparts in the private sector. Have you ever seen a stressed out, highly productive gov't employee?
So your saying that $2.8 trillion isn't enough confiscation from the hard working peole to run this bloat pig of a goverment? Spoken like a true progress liberal( code word for communist) What fool.