Tea Parties fault? The GOP?

Thats nothing short of delusional. The Democrats have controlled congress for the better part of 5 years.

No budget for over 800 days from Obama and the Democrats.

The GOP passed cut cap and balance and the Democrats blocked it. Had it passed and been signed there would have been no downgrade. S&P already said that.

But some of you blame the Tea Party? Really?

For all you "rich people" haters, let me give you a little reality check.

Poor people aren't poor because rich people are rich.

Any one of you ever been offered a job, health benefits and a 401K plan by a poor person?

The true THEIF is the government, not people who worked hard all their lives and made it big.

No Surprise Here
 

Those that continue to assert that "cut, cap and balance" was the way to go or even politically possible, haven't done the arithmetic.

What would the country look like if we "capped" federal spending at $3.9 trillion and then "cut" expenses by $1.6 trillion to "balance"? If the Tea Party had such a plan, what was it? Where would $1.6 trillion be cut? What would the effect have been on the U.S. economy? The world economy?

I know an answer will take more than fourteen words and will actually have to include some numbers, but go ahead and give it a try.

Well, they had to wait for Obamacare to pass before they knew what was in it?

:BigApplause::BigApplause:

Typical smoke and mirrors VK. We don't and never had a tax problem, we have a SPENDING problem.

The government is a big giant wasteful spending black hole and most thinking people know it.

You can type up all the 15 page diatribes you like but it doesn't change a thing nor does it make it true.

This is a government spending problem pure and simple and there are plenty of places to cut without raising a dime in taxes.

But some of us know the government NEVER does with less. Only we are expected to do with less.

Amen.:cry:

While I’m at it, here’s another big fat lie from the left. All you hear them say including Obama is that millionaires and billionaires aren’t paying their fair share. Isn’t it interesting that they consider a small business with maybe two or three employees grossing $250k a year millionaires and billionaires whom they can also fleece so they can keep spending.

Why don’t we just pound them with higher taxes, toss in a little Obamacare and more regulation for good measure, maybe that will make them hire more employees and take the risk to expand their business. The very businesses by the way who employ a good bit of the people out there… or used to anyway.

But none the less, it’s all the Tea Party’s fault I’m sure. All we need to do is tax more and spend more and everything will be just peachy.

The total lack of common sense these days is mind boggling.

Here’s a simple idea. Why doesn’t the government balance their own budget and keep their grimy little mitts out of ours? You might be surprised how fast the economy turns around and how much more revenue they generate.

It seems the Wall Street Journal has a disagreement with your analysis.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...782561014.html

Predictable
 

First, Richie, I never said I was against cut, cap and balance. In fact, on many occasions in this forum I have said I embrace the ideals of the Tea Party, just not the destructive and irresponsible way they tried to go about getting their way.

What I asked above was, if the bill that was passed by the House was put into law, what $1.6 trillion in spending would be cut? And what might the effect have been on the U.S. and world economy?

Predictably, I didn't get an answer. That's because those here that mindlessly embrace the Tea Party with soundbite-type statements have never done the arithmetic. That's because the Tea Party themselves have never done the arithmetic or put forth a detailed plan on what the "cuts" would be in cut, cap and balance.

Even the official GOP budget, the Paul Ryan proposal, which was very much the right size in my opinion, only cut $4.4 trillion in spending in ten years. That plan was far from capping and balancing and would have added $12-14 trillion to the national debt in ten years.

So once more, anyone want to try answering my question?...what $1.6 trillion in federal spending would you cut in order to balance the budget? If you can't answer the question, don't bother responding with some repetitive soundbite or link to an article that also doesn't answer the question.

And by the way, Richie, the article you linked was only letter to the editor published by the Wall Street Journal. You weren't suggesting that the article stated the actual opinion of the publication were you? Or were you?

I don't see where you get that it's a "letter to the editor". It appears on WSJ's "Opinion Page".

There are many who believe that Cut Cap & Balance would have resulted in retention of our AAA Credit Rating.

Send me a copy of the Federal Budget and I'll get back to you on my recommended cuts.

Cuts? Well there are a few worthless departments we could eliminate like the dept of energy, education, the arts. We can trim the military, repeal the destructive Obamacare for starters.
I think that the most hard core defense people will agree that the military complex is out of hand. Let some of the freeloader countries protect their own land and people. With satellites and pilotless drones, we can scrap alot of equipment and keep only the pertinent hardware.
Well, I've named a few. Feel free to jump in here.

Now, about those entitlements....:D

Total BS yet again but a rather brilliant redirection away from those who are the truly destructive and irresponsible ones.

Yes VK, we can do arithmetic too. We earn X so we can only spend X. At least that's how it works for responsible people. Stop blaming the Tea Party.

We await your next mathematical formula...

Thanks
 

Thanks for at least thinking about the question. I wish there were more here who would take the time themselves.

The problem most people fail to grasp is the enormity of the fiscal problem we face. If we eliminated ALL the things you mentioned, it would only reduce deficit spending by a small amount. In fact if we eliminated ALL items in the discretionary budget--all the departments and programs that we know as "government", Homeland Security, Interior, Education, HUD, even the salaries for Congress and the executive branch--we'd still have a budget deficit of about $900 billion each year, which would be added to the national debt.

Obviously, we can't eliminate all discretionary expenditures. But you're absolutely correct when you say, "...what about those entitlements?" But what people don't realize is how deeply those entitlement programs will be cut to even come close to balancing the budget. I've said this before here..."the necessary cuts to Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, VA insurance, etc. will truly be life-changing for all of us."

You totally miss one major point. More people working means more tax revenue to the government.

How about the penny plan? Roll back spending levels to 2008 and cut 1% across the board.

The Democrats won't even cut 1 penny out of every dollar.

THATS THE PROBLEM.