Originally Posted by bkcunningham1

In the case of Greece the root of their problems come from socialism and liberal mindedness....Excessive spending and borrowing by the Greek government to pay for the excessive government programs has caused rioting on the streets by the public sector unions at the very mention of spending cuts....Public sector pensions funds in Greece are in shambles.....I think the lesson we in America need to take from Greece is to get off the road to government entitlements and misguided union control and corruption....

I'm not sure that Greece's problems can be blamed on any particular party or ideology. Not any more than we can clearly assign blame for our current situation to either conservatives or liberals, Republicans or Democrats. Recent history is crystal clear that all of them contributed significantly to our worsening fiscal crisis. It's not going to make much difference which party or stated ideology prevails in coming elections. Sooner or later our political leaders are going to have to tell the public, "...we have to stop...we have to cut spending in ways that will change your way of life pretty significantly...we may have to tax you more..."

If our political leaders continue down the road of profligate spending--for whatever purpose, political or ideological--then it will be our creditors, mainly China, Saudi Arabia and other oil-rich middle eastern countries, and Japan who will be making the decisions on how our country will be run, not those we elect to do that job.

Think about that when you enter the voting booth next November. Rather than voting for a party or some neat political metaphors, we'd better start voting for representatives who recognize the problem, and who we believe will have the strength of character to make some really hard decisions, knowing that the majority of Americans won't understand and may riot in the streets, like the Greeks are doing now.

There is no other way...CUT SPENDING!!...START NOW!!

Okay I'm confused. Donna's post from the
Wall Street Journal talks about the "debt commission" made up of 18 members (ten Democrats and 8 Republicans).

What is the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board? What is the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform? That is the board that Obama appointed his friend and former president of the largest US labor organization Andy Stern to be a member of.

How do they work together? Are they one and the same?

I know that the members of the Economic Recovery Advisory Board includes:
Jeffrey Immelt, General Electric chief executive
James W. Owens, head of Caterpillar
Robert Wolf, chairman and CEO of UBS Group Americas
Mark Gallogly, founder and managing partner at Centerbridge Partners L.P.
Penny Pritzker, chair and founder of Pritzker Realty Group and Classic Residence by Hyatt
John Doerr, partner at Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers
Monica C. Lozano, Director of Bank of America
Charles E. Phillips, Jr., president of Oracle Corporation.
Richard L. Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO
Austan Goolsbee, PERAB Staff Director and Chief Economist
William H. Donaldson, former Securities and Exchange Commission chairman
Laura D'Andrea Tyson, Member
Martin Feldstein, former chief economic advisor to President Ronald Reagan,
Roger W. Ferguson, Jr., Member
David F. Swensen, CIO at Yale University

Originally Posted by billethkid

...let's try something different. Let's have the Dem leaning, Obama supporters tell one thing they do not like about Obama's current direction and or his administration. And those opposed or perceived to be opposed tell one thing they like...

Good suggestion, Billie. No elected official from either party is all good or all bad. Maybe your suggestion will tilt the dialog in that direction, rather than just the ongoing diatribe against one person/party or the other.

I voted for Obama, but I will very likely not vote for his re-election. While I think a lot of the things accomplished by his administration are positive, there is one which I believe is a huge negative, and is the issue that will most likely cost him my vote.

I believe that he is absolutely smart enough and has surrounded himself with financial people who I am certain have advised him that the fiscal problems of the U.S. have reached a critical stage. The growing deficit spending and resultant escalating national debt are unsustainable. I am equally certain that he has been advised of the required solutions--dramatic spending cuts including major slashes of entitlements and possibly increased taxation. And I am also certain that his political advisors have told him that if he were to utter these ideas publicly, it will almost certainly cost him a chance of a second-term election. President Obama's unwillingness to face up to these problems, regardless of the political cost, is a flaw that I cannot...will not...overlook.

There you go. That's my "bitch". I'm really curious whether any of the Obama bashers will admit to anything that they think the man has done well.

VK, I absolutely agee we have to insist that our representatives stop spending and make cuts in the federal budget. But to say that recognizing goals, agenda's and political ideology is wrong is beyond my understanding. Of course you have to understand what someone stands for and believes in before you can vote to have them represent you. Ideolgies are the foundations of governments and the cause of wars and disagreements from discussions on this forum to political parties.

Originally Posted by bkcunningham1

Okay I'm confused. Donna's post from the
Wall Street Journal talks about the "debt commission" made up of 18 members (ten Democrats and 8 Republicans)...What is the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform?

Here's my understanding of this commission and what is expected from it.

Initially, it was proposed that a bi-partisan commission be formed according to Congressional rules. I can't recall the name of the commission, but the rules required that it be formed on a non-partisan basis and that the recommendations of the commission not be subject to further hearings, committee meetings or amendments and be voted on by Congress. The objective set down for the proposed commission was to arrive at recommendations for reducing deficit spending and beginning to pay down the national debt. All items of federal spending were to be on the table as well as tax increases, if that's what the commission were to recommend.

Both the Democrats and Republicans in the Senate approved the proposal for such a commission on a non-party line 53-46 vote (37 Democrats and 16 Republicans voting 'aye'), not enough to meet the Senate's 60-vote requirement. The Republican objectors refused to accept the idea of such a commission because they wanted the opportunity to run it's recommendations thru various committees and offer amendments to change or even eliminate all or parts of the commission recommendations. The Democrats objecting rejected the proposed commission because all of the entitlement programs were to be subject to spending cut proposals by the commission.

After the Senate rejected the proposal for a commission that would require the Congress to vote on its recommendations, President Obama formed the commission that has now begun to hold hearings and do research. The objectives of that commission still excludes consideration of any entitlement programs or the defense budget. It's weight in our law will be similar to that of the 9-1-1 commission. Of course, we all know how many of the well thought-out recommendations of the 9-1-1 commission were ever made into law, don't we? Hardly any.

So to answer your question, BK, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform will be another "toothless tiger" which will come up with a laundry list of spending cuts and probably even tax increases which would begin to chip away at deficit spending and reducing the national debt. The commission will not address any of the entitlement programs, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid or the Defense budget, which currently comprises about 55% of federal spending and growing.

But because the Senate refused to cede their right to politicize the recommendations made by the commission, even on the less than half of the budget that they permitted the commission to look at, the commission report which will be published sometime late in 2010 will likely provide the basis for lots of news coverage, comment by the political entertainers, pontificating by members of Congress...and little else. Just like the 9-1-1 commission.

Shameful! But I have to at least give credit to those Senators (37 Democrats and 16 Republicans) for trying an approach to reducing deficit spending and the national debt that would bypass a lot of the procedural impediments that would permit members of Congress to "protect" their favorite elements of spending and/or eliminate any proposals for inceasing revenues. The proposed approach would have forced members of Congress to publicly and finally lay down their cards, either as individual members or as a parties, and vote yea or nay on doing what an independent commission recommended be done. What has not been done is for anyone to explain to the people how the Senate, both the GOP as well as Democrats, acted in a way to castrate an approach to fiscal responsibility before it ever had a chance.

A good news report on the failure of the proposed committee is at

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/7...age=2#comments

I get what you said VK, but what about the other commissions I mentioned? The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and the other one, President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. They are different than the one you just described right?

off the couch and into the voting booth.

I am not against him because he is a Democrat. As stated by me in many previous posts, like most of us I am a victim of my background. As a corporate executive, I was/am of the breed and ilk of the Jack Welch method of management. YOU are accountable and responsible for all that happens in your business. Do what you said you were going to do...do what ever it takes to deliver on a commitment...hire only the very best at what they do and do better than you do...get rid of the dead wood/non performers/free loaders...you own what you got in your position, if it is broke it is yours, fix it.

And most importantly always be number one at what you do...and do what ever it takes to stay there.

I always was sort of side ways with the board of directors of my company businesses as I was not and still am not....politically inclined. Because my businesses made their commitments, I earned the privledge of let me say...talking back, telling them like it was and not just what they wanted to hear.

Hence I do not support Obama, nor the Congress or Senate as they do not measure up. They do not perform with accountability or responsibility. And they are certainly not doing what it takes to remain or be number one.

I really could be more positive about Obama if he did some of what he articulates. As for our representatives....there is no hope of that for the current regime.

btk

Originally Posted by billethkid

off the couch and into the voting booth.

I am not against him because he is a Democrat. As stated by me in many previous posts, like most of us I am a victim of my background. As a corporate executive, I was/am of the breed and ilk of the Jack Welch method of management. YOU are accountable and responsible for all that happens in your business. Do what you said you were going to do...do what ever it takes to deliver on a commitment...hire only the very best at what they do and do better than you do...get rid of the dead wood/non performers/free loaders...you own what you got in your position, if it is broke it is yours, fix it.

And most importantly always be number one at what you do...and do what ever it takes to stay there.

I always was sort of side ways with the board of directors of my company businesses as I was not and still am not....politically inclined. Because my businesses made their commitments, I earned the privledge of let me say...talking back, telling them like it was and not just what they wanted to hear.

Hence I do not support Obama, nor the Congress or Senate as they do not measure up. They do not perform with accountability or responsibility. And they are certainly not doing what it takes to remain or be number one.

I really could be more positive about Obama if he did some of what he articulates. As for our representatives....there is no hope of that for the current regime.

btk

I dont know whether it counts if I simply agree with what BTK has said about the President especially this..."I really could be more positive about Obama if he did some of what he articulates."

Most times he is doing the polar opposite of what he says and the politics are ALWAYS in the forefront.

As I said before when he was elected inside me I hoped I was wrong and that he would somethings he said he would do !

VK asked for positives and I suppose this does not come up to that standard in total but really if he just told the truth and forgot politics for just one minute I could get on some of his bandwagons !