THE SPEECH
 

Obama uses speech to try and break debt logjam - Washington Times

I dislike the fact that O'bama used prime time to grandstand and lobby the country for what he wants when everyone else says no new taxes.

THE RETURN OF FUZZY MATH! I read yesterday they want to use accounting techniques like "Oh we're going to save this over the next 10 years in Afghanistan so we'll take that #^&#^&#^&#^&

NO BS it's true. HOCUS POCUS :smash:

The deadline is August 2nd and there still is no deal. I don't think his speech was grandstanding, it was a dose of reality. A part of the GOP is holding the entire US economy hostage in an attempt to get Obama to capitulate.

While most people think the Federal Government spends too much, also I think the polls have pretty consistently shown that people favor a balanced approach to deficit reduction in alignment with the findings of the bi-partisan debt commission.

You say you don't want a tax increase (for the wealthy mind you) but a default would likely increase borrowing costs for EVERYBODY. Perhaps you think the middle class is doing great and can take that extra point on their mortgage.

And don't forget that the majority of the current deficit is due to the Bush tax cuts, the Bush Prescription Drug entitlement, two wars Bush started and Bush led bail out the Banks. Bi-partisan problems require bi-partisan solutions and some compromise.

There is a way out of this mess but your Obama hate is just getting in the way.

-spence

Funny, we only hear about the Repubs not giving in on Tax increases, a comprimise meand the Dems need to cut spending (significantly) as well. For DECADES the Dems have pulled the Repubs to the left and now they pull back a little an d they aren't comprimising...

:rotf2::rotf2::rotf2::rotf2: talk about someone that needs a dose of reality, regurgitate Obama's lame talking points and you sound as deluded, childish and dishonest as he continually shows himself to be :uhuh: ("Please put at least a little effort in it.-spence")

you forgot to compare him favorably to Reagan:yak5:....... I wish he'd "address the nation" every night...even the hardcore Obamorons must have been disappointed in that performance....

Yeah, just pointing to Obama, or Bush, misses the way out.

OB seems to be far more concerned with the upcoming election than putting a plan in place to pay down our debt, which is crazy looking at the weak lineup the repubs have to face him.

Spence - a little word substitution. Crude yes, but I only have a few minutes off working today.

The deadline is August 2nd and there still is no deal. I think he is doing a little CYA in case this breaks. Is this political brinkmanship? Washing his hands a bit? The Whitehouse is holding the entire US economy hostage in an attempt to get the House to capitulate.

While most people think the Federal Government raises more than enough revenue, Big Government still finds a way to spend too much. Also I think the polls have pretty consistently shown that tax payers favor a balanced approach to deficit reduction but with a real emphasis of reducing spending. We're pretty good at raising revenue but we are far too good at spending it. We kick and scream at how much money we spend except for when our Reps and Senators bring it back to our district.

You say you (taxpayer) don't want yet another tax increase (for the middle class mind you) but a default would likely increase borrowing costs for EVERYBODY. That is today. Of course the long term problem is that your existing middle class deductions (mortgage interest deductions, child deductions) will need to be removed to generate sufficient revenue. Unfortunately, if we took every dime from the rich, there is not enough money to pay for programs we Americans like. So unless we really take a hard look at how we spend and make significant cuts, then the difference will again be on the backs of the middle class.

Don't forget, government is not the engine that creates jobs, American business do. So the more and more this American business engine gets crushed the more people not working, the more people needing help, the more we spend in deficit. Right now the cart is driving the horse.

And don't forget that the biggest jump ever in deficit spending has occurred between 2007-2011. Between TARP, Tax Cuts, the Wars, expansions in entitlement programs, (which was supposed to save money :rotf2:) so we then and went and added trillions more in liability to come in effect after 2012 elections (sidebar, funny how the bill will come in after the next political round).

Bi-partisan problems require bi-partisan solutions and some compromise. The cash cow is dead. Big Government killed the cash cow. 40 cents on the dollar goes to pay interest. The cash cow has moved from programs to now paying interest. Why we need to borrow more and raise the ceiling.

There is a way out of this mess but fiscal common sense is being prevented along partisan lines.

http://politisite.com/wp-content/upl...it-276x195.jpg

Lets not forget that the evil house has twice passed legislation to fix / mitigate this. Yet the previous house, the existing Senate, and Obama have "kicked the can further down the road"

What is the point of having a debt ceiling if it doesn't force us to look at how we are doing things? My family's liability is about $150THOUSAND dollars. But based on % of tax payers that PAY income tax its probably more like $300K dollars.

This debt ceiling is a stop sign at an intersection. You need to come to a stop and evaluate which way you are going to go. It is not something that should automatically just be blow through.

Wow good Post John couldn't say it any better

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That was my exact feeling 3 sentences into the speech.
The man is in constant campaign mode.

Only good thing he said was to contact your congressman.
I did and simply said, "No Compromise."

Max your credit card out, cut back on your spending and at the same
time get another credit card. Ya, that wil work. :rollem:

Guess he missed Economics 101, the more you have the more you spend.

Now we're going to depression

WH's Pfeiffer: Not Raising Debt Ceiling "Could Potentially Put Us Towards A Depression" | RealClearPolitics

BICKER BICKER BICKER :smash:

What's next the Boogeyman?

no plan

Carney Gets Hit for Ten Minutes on The Obama Plan - By Daniel Foster - The Corner - National Review Online

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/VIt...263874-1-0.jpg

He's got a bigger puss on his face than my 8 year old does when I tell him no ice cream :D

No hate here for the man, just disdain for his agenda and policies.

Just what is Obama's plan for the mess and where are his numbers?

The way it's shaping up looks like he wants to go the same route
as Obama Care. No one would know what's in it until it's passed.

Imho, as a leader he needs to step up, see the reality of the fact we're broke,
stop spending, put a cap on the current budget make sacrifices now,
rather then trying to look good for 2012. That's what a true leader would do
wether it's popular or not.

He needs to ask himself, ask not what his country can do for him,
but what is best for the country, and more spending is not.

He doesn't have a plan. Carney said so yesterday

Jerk
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Was speaking to the bugger...

I believe Obama has endorsed the bi-partisan debt commission recommendations. While they're attacking Carney for not outlining an "Obama Plan" I'm not sure it makes any sense the Administration to do so. Obama has already given consent to very deep spending cuts in exchange for increase revenues. The Tea Party faction of the GOP has got our economy by the balls and even the House Leader can't control the situation.

Boehner misses cuts target, delays deficit vote - politics - Capitol Hill - msnbc.com

I think this is exactly the point, and why Obama has called for spending cuts along with increases in tax revenues.

Given our situation we need to look at EVERY avenue available to get on a sustainable trajectory. House freshman who all signed "no tax" pledges to gain early party backing are in my opinion taking an position that threatens our national security. For more senior House and Senate leadership to be opposing any revenue increases as a matter of principal should go back to their own voting records which document how they've contributed to the deficits we are now facing!

Hell, even Reagan increased taxes 16 times during his presidency in an attempt to offset excessive spending. This fact seems to get lost when the Right likes to proclaim he brought about the growth of the 1990's. Note: It was probably more a product of low oil prices and the invention of the Personal Computer :hihi:

We can't solve this problem through spending cuts alone, and contrary to the assertion that the Bush Tax Cuts increased revenues...well, I think there plenty of analysis that shows they didn't.

FactCheck.org: Supply-side Spin
Bush Administration Tax Policy: Effects on Long-Term Growth - Brookings Institution
Etc...

And tragically, we also know that the mid-decade boom from 2003-2008 was being driven not by stable growth but rather a real estate bubble about to pop.

Reality check...

Real wages continue to lag inflation for several decades now. Wealth generation appears to be more a product of speculation than productivity in the marketplace. Overall taxation in this country is at an historic low and effective tax rates allow the top earners to pay far below the top brackets while they bemoan progressive taxation (Warren Buffett excluded ;)). The wealth gap continues to grow. We have 15 trillion USD in Federal debt...and the topic of short-term revenue generation through taxation is OFF THE TABLE?

If I had a friend in a similar situation I'd tell them to stop going to Starbucks every morning and get a second job.

I'd love for us to spend less and tax less, I'd also like every day to be Christmas, but there's the way it ought to be and then the way it is.

-spence

Nice, now there's talk that Boehner might not even be able to get a bill out of the House...and according to the CBO the Reid plan cuts the deficit more than the Boehner plan.

I certainly don't expect any Tea Party member to endorse a Democratic proposal.

-spence

__________________________________________________ ___________________
The way it ought to be is a lean- mean country ridding it self of debt
and leraning to live with what we have, not what would be nice to have..

He's gonna pull out the 14th amendment

Nobody is going to want to debate yet another debt ceiling during the election and peak consumer spending around christmas

crazy stuff :uhuh:

more HOCUS POCUS

Debt fight could bring more airwaves for broadband - Yahoo! News

As Sprint/Nextel reports another quarter with crappy numbers and more debt.

hahahahahahahahaha I love it. Next to Timmy tripping over his shoelaces and falling flat on his face nothing would make me happier if I went to the grave tomorrow than to see Nextel go out of business :happy:

And they think theyre going to get $13 billion? :rotf2:

Sprint posts wider loss, teams with LightSquared - Yahoo! News

Stephen Moore: Warren Buffett Is Wrong on Taxes - WSJ.com

During Monday night's national address, President Obama recited the Buffet line that millionaires and billionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretaries. Democrats in Congress routinely cite Mr. Buffett's tax confessions as irrefutable evidence that tax rates on the very rich are too low and the system is unfair. Taxes on millionaires and billionaires are already near a record high in terms of the share of all income taxes paid. And the effective tax rate on this group is much higher, not lower, than any other income category. The best way to balance the budget is for the economy to produce a lot more American success stories like Warren Buffett.


"First of all, Mr Buffet isn't "making BILLIONS". He holds assets that represent unrealized capital gains in the several tens of billions (primarily shares of Berkshire-Hathaway). If BH were to go belly up tomorrow, his holdings become worthless. His company pays him a salary of $100,000 each year, and he "earns" a few million dollars every year in interest and dividends. This income, plus his salary, is what he pays taxes on, much of which is taxed at the lower capital gains rate rather than income tax rate. Quoting his tax rate, based on CG rates compared to his secretaries, based on income tax rates (and not at his or her *effective* income tax rate, at that) is apples and oranges.

Mr Buffet takes full advantage of the tax system to minimize his taxes. He has accountants and tax lawyers. He has clearly structured his affairs to minimize his taxes, as, for example, when he established trusts for his children.

It is further worth noting that when Mr. Buffet and his friends Bill & Melinda Gates set out to figure out how to improve the world, they created the tax-exempt foundation and donated billions of dollars to the foundation, rather than simply letting the government have that money. We have to ask why? Didn't they trust to government to do the "right thing" with that money?

Finally, note that both Gates and Buffet, when they donated to the foundation, did so by giving away appreciated shares of their respective companies, thus garnering for themselves the largest tax break possible--not only did they not have to pay GC taxes on the gains (substantial they were, too), but they get to claim the *appreciated* value as a deductible charitable contribution. So, if WB had been granted one share of BH when it sold for $1000, he would owe income taxes on on the $1000. But if he held that share until BH sold for $200,000 per share, he would owe income taxes on the $1000, and CG taxes on the $199,000 difference. But by donating the share to the foundation, he still owes income taxes on the $1000, pays no CG taxes, and gets to claim $200,000 charitable donation (which can go a long way to offsetting any other income he has)."