Government shutdown averted

PLC1

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
10,665
Location
The Golden State
Werbung:
sucks but had to get a deal done, and while the Dems gave to much to soon for to little back...in the end its done, and no shutdown so will take it..though I am sure the tea party will still find reason to hate it.

If the liberal Democrats hate it, and the Tea Party hates it too, then it must be a pretty good compromise.
 
sucks but had to get a deal done, and while the Dems gave to much to soon for to little back...in the end its done, and no shutdown so will take it..though I am sure the tea party will still find reason to hate it.

The taxpayer-funded purveyors of infanticide are still in-business. That's what the Democrats cared the most about.

The Republicans still caved in. They started out with about $62 billion in cuts, and settled for about $38 billion.

About 90% of these politicians are cowards. They make me puke.
 
If the liberal Democrats hate it, and the Tea Party hates it too, then it must be a pretty good compromise.

A deal had to be done, a shutdown was not good for anyone. This issue is far from over however, as I think Congress has to vote on increasing the debt limit this summer. That will turn in to quite the battle as well.
 
1,480,000,000,000
---37,800,000,000
==============
1,442,200,000,000

Wow indeed! Only 1.4 Trillion left to cut and we'll no longer be running a deficit! Hooray for bipartisanship! :rolleyes:

You didn't think the budget was actually going to get balanced this go around did you?
 
You didn't think the budget was actually going to get balanced this go around did you?

I don't expect the budget to ever truly be balanced. I expect our nation to continue spending until total financial insolvency. However, this was an opportunity to provide significant cuts to the budget and offer a glimmer of hope.

Unlike you, I do think we are reaching the point of no return, the fiscal ball has been punted for generations and now that SS, formerly a cash cow for the federal budget, will be paying out more than it brings in for the first time since its creation, we are looking at a steep, irreversable decline.

Republicans asked for 62 billion and that was said to be "draconian" (as are all cuts according to the Democrats) and Democrats offered 30 billion (they consider not raising a budget the same thing as a cut). Both offers were chump change when staring at a 1.48 trillion dollar deficit. On SS alone, the shortfall for what's paid out and what's brought in this year is a deficit of 54 billion. We needed 54 billion or more in cuts just to tread water on the deficit, 37.8 means we're still sinking.

Republicans should have asked for 620 billion in cuts. Perhaps then the compromise number would have been 100 billion or more, that would have kept hope for solvency alive.
 
I don't expect the budget to ever truly be balanced. I expect our nation to continue spending until total financial insolvency. However, this was an opportunity to provide significant cuts to the budget and offer a glimmer of hope.

Unlike you, I do think we are reaching the point of no return, the fiscal ball has been punted for generations and now that SS, formerly a cash cow for the federal budget, will be paying out more than it brings in for the first time since its creation, we are looking at a steep, irreversable decline.

Republicans asked for 62 billion and that was said to be "draconian" (as are all cuts according to the Democrats) and Democrats offered 30 billion (they consider not raising a budget the same thing as a cut). Both offers were chump change when staring at a 1.48 trillion dollar deficit. On SS alone, the shortfall for what's paid out and what's brought in this year is a deficit of 54 billion. We needed 54 billion or more in cuts just to tread water on the deficit, 37.8 means we're still sinking.

Republicans should have asked for 620 billion in cuts. Perhaps then the compromise number would have been 100 billion or more, that would have kept hope for solvency alive.

Agreed.

We have learned a couple things from this fiasco.

1. There is not ONE Democrat in Congress or the WH willing to stop the debt train from crashing. They will do nothing but obstruct any and all efforts to control spending and reduce the deficit. And, the media stands with them.

2. The Rs lack the guts and willingness to fight to save the nation from the coming disaster. But, there are a few Rs willing to fight they just are not in the leadership...yet.

I hope in next years election the American people continue to vote out Ds and liberal Rs and of course, Obama. Then maybe sanity will return.
 
After Raising National Deficit to $1.65 Trillion, Obama Thinks Cutting $38 Billion Is “Living Within Our Means”
Posted by Jim Hoft on Saturday, April 9, 2011, 2:35 PM

Obama talked again about “living within our means” in his Weekly Address today.

"Beginning to live within our means is the only way to protect the investments that will help America compete for new jobs – investments in our kids’ education and student loans; in clean energy and life-saving medical research."

Of Course, Obama was bragging about the fact that he agreed to cut $38.5 billion from the federal budget this year. This is after Obama, Pelosi, Reid and Democrats added over a trillion dollars to the annual federal budget in the last 4 years.

federal-budget.jpg

That’s at least a 30% increase in federal spending in just 3 years.
Is that “living withing our means?”

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/04/after-raising-national-deficit-to-1-65-trillion-obama-thinks-cutting-38-billion-is-living-within-our-means/

How can one believe a word Obama says when he is so often caught lying?

And, the MSM accepts his lies without a word.
 
Pretty meaningless cuts but at least this distraction is over and getting serious about cutting costs in the 2012 budget can begin.

Nice to see that there is at least one grownup on te hill (the speaker of the house).
 
Gasp! Sob! Omigod - the gummint almost closed! It's like taking people's religion away! How could we survive even an hour without the gummint??? :D
 
The final agreement, if approved, would cut $37.8 billion from the federal budget through the end of September, congressional aides said.

Does that mean that the govt will spend $37.8 billion less for this period, than it did for the equivalent period last year?

Or does it mean that instead of increasing spending by $1,500 billion (or whatever), they are going to increase spending by $1,500-$37.8 billion... that is, they will increase spending by "only" $1,462.2 billion?
 
Werbung:
Does that mean that the govt will spend $37.8 billion less for this period, than it did for the equivalent period last year?

Or does it mean that instead of increasing spending by $1,500 billion (or whatever), they are going to increase spending by $1,500-$37.8 billion... that is, they will increase spending by "only" $1,462.2 billion?

Most likely the latter
 
Back
Top