If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   Republican budget counter-proposal calls for spending decreases of $4.6 trillion over 10 years by dipping into the magic bean reserve   (npr.org) divider line 130
    More: Fail, GOP, White House, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, magic, Erskine Bowles, reductions  
•       •       •

3261 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Dec 2012 at 10:26 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-04 08:18:13 AM  
During a briefing, senior congressional Republican aides said the proposal is "a fair, middle ground" based on an idea floated during testimony by Erskine Bowles, of the Bowles-Simpson Commission, which the president tasked with finding a long-term solution to the country's debt issue.

Erskine Bowles
While I'm flattered the Speaker would call something "the Bowles plan," the approach outlined in the letter Speaker Boehner sent to the President does not represent the Simpson-Bowles plan, nor is it the Bowles plan. Link
 
2012-12-04 08:28:35 AM  
Nation: but the election results......
House GOP: Lalalalala I can't hear you.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-12-04 08:45:47 AM  
So, pretty much the same as the last 30 years?
 
2012-12-04 09:00:52 AM  

vpb: So, pretty much the same as the last 30 years?


I honestly cannot remember the GOP being quite *this* insane. They've turned it up to 11 in the past 4 or so years.

I will admit, though, that it's amusing that the President's debt-reduction plan includes an *increase* in spending. While I can see people making millions of dollars or more having a slightly higher tax rate (which is probably still ridiculously low compared to historical rates), it's silly to add spending to that, too.

Unless debt reduction isn't the primary goal, that is...
 
2012-12-04 10:29:51 AM  

Speaker2Animals: Nation: but the election results......
House GOP: Lalalalala I can't hear you.


I remember someone once saying something about elections having consequences.
 
2012-12-04 10:31:09 AM  
Let me guess, no taxes increases on the wealthy, no closing magic loopholes, and no cuts to DoD budget.

Why is it that if someone takes advantage of a corporate tax/welfare they are a smart businessman, but if someone takes advantage of a food stamp program to feed their child they are a moocher?
 
2012-12-04 10:31:13 AM  

xanadian: vpb: So, pretty much the same as the last 30 years?

I honestly cannot remember the GOP being quite *this* insane. They've turned it up to 11 in the past 4 or so years.

I will admit, though, that it's amusing that the President's debt-reduction plan includes an *increase* in spending. While I can see people making millions of dollars or more having a slightly higher tax rate (which is probably still ridiculously low compared to historical rates), it's silly to add spending to that, too.

Unless debt reduction isn't the primary goal, that is...


It SHOULDN'T be the primary goal. Fixing the American economy and infrastructure should come first, and that costs money. When things are cleaned up, THEN we should worry about the debt.

Plus, the deficit is already dropping at the fastest rate since post-WWII. So slowing the decrease won't hurt.
 
2012-12-04 10:31:19 AM  
Republicans:

"We were told there would be no math!"
 
2012-12-04 10:31:22 AM  
During a briefing, senior congressional Republican aides said the proposal is "a fair, middle ground" based on an idea floated during testimony by Erskine Bowles, of the Bowles-Simpson Commission

The operative phrase here is 'based on'.
My body is 'based on' the same design as John Holmes, but there are some pretty significant differences.

And even if it was the exact Simpson-Bowles plan, wasn't that the thing their VP candidate from last month thought was so evil he torpedoed it before it could get out of committee?
 
2012-12-04 10:33:13 AM  

LordJiro: xanadian: vpb: So, pretty much the same as the last 30 years?

I honestly cannot remember the GOP being quite *this* insane. They've turned it up to 11 in the past 4 or so years.

I will admit, though, that it's amusing that the President's debt-reduction plan includes an *increase* in spending. While I can see people making millions of dollars or more having a slightly higher tax rate (which is probably still ridiculously low compared to historical rates), it's silly to add spending to that, too.

Unless debt reduction isn't the primary goal, that is...

It SHOULDN'T be the primary goal. Fixing the American economy and infrastructure should come first, and that costs money. When things are cleaned up, THEN we should worry about the debt.

Plus, the deficit is already dropping at the fastest rate since post-WWII. So slowing the decrease won't hurt.


Well said.
 
2012-12-04 10:35:30 AM  
I posted this yesterday in another thread:

Bullet Points:

1) End Medicare as we know it
2) Convert Medicaid to a block grant, effectively ending Medicaid as we know it
3) Cut compensation for federal employees and cut funding to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

These are the reforms that Republicans believe are "absolutely essential to addressing the true drivers of our debt".

They also outright refuse to accept higher tax rates, "in order to protect small businesses and our economy", instead generating revenue by closing loopholes and deductions, with no details whatsoever.

These clowns need to be smacked down. Really farking hard.
 
2012-12-04 10:36:12 AM  

Citrate1007: Let me guess, no taxes increases on the wealthy, no closing magic loopholes, and no cuts to DoD budget.

Why is it that if someone takes advantage of a corporate tax/welfare they are a smart businessman, but if someone takes advantage of a food stamp program to feed their child they are a moocher?


I suspect that there are cuts to the DoD, but they mostly take the form of "We're not going to be in Afghanistan anymore. We will therefore not need lots and lots of money to house, feed and transport (not to mention protect and a bunch of other things) troops to and around that country."

That, and Panetta and the JCOS have said they can withstand - and want - some programs to be cut. Congress likes their pork, so military districts won't have THEIR shiat cut, but everyone else's military district...

// how many families' worth of food stamps, nationwide, could be paid for with every $10m we tax or take from another part of the budget?
// because that's money for grocers (i.e. businessmen, many of them small), not "the poors"
 
2012-12-04 10:36:41 AM  
Rejected by the White House within an hour. I'm really, really starting to like second term Obama.
 
2012-12-04 10:37:34 AM  
In other news, cutting benefits for a program funded by taxes isn't raising taxes. Not renewing tax cuts? Raising taxes.
 
2012-12-04 10:37:49 AM  

xanadian: vpb: So, pretty much the same as the last 30 years?

I honestly cannot remember the GOP being quite *this* insane. They've turned it up to 11 in the past 4 or so years.

I will admit, though, that it's amusing that the President's debt-reduction plan includes an *increase* in spending. While I can see people making millions of dollars or more having a slightly higher tax rate (which is probably still ridiculously low compared to historical rates), it's silly to add spending to that, too.

Unless debt reduction isn't the primary goal, that is...


Debt reduction as the primary goal? That's easy! Just default! Poof, debt instantly gone!

Oh wait, maybe you didn't really want it as the *primary* goal? Maybe you had other goals that are at least as if not more important like not completely imploding the economy? Hmm... it's almost like this is complicated or something.
 
2012-12-04 10:38:09 AM  
So a group of House members that represent districts gerrymandered to represent only yokels, morons, and hill folk, get to determine the future of the country for the rest of the 300 million. Ain't democracy grand?
 
2012-12-04 10:38:47 AM  

xanadian: vpb: So, pretty much the same as the last 30 years?

I honestly cannot remember the GOP being quite *this* insane. They've turned it up to 11 in the past 4 or so years.

I will admit, though, that it's amusing that the President's debt-reduction plan includes an *increase* in spending. While I can see people making millions of dollars or more having a slightly higher tax rate (which is probably still ridiculously low compared to historical rates), it's silly to add spending to that, too.

Unless debt reduction isn't the primary goal, that is...


They have to stay ahead of Democrat derangement of face undifferentiation and dissolution.
 
2012-12-04 10:39:16 AM  

imontheinternet: Rejected by the White House within an hour. I'm really, really starting to like second term Obama.


Wait until he drops the mic at the end of the State Of The Union with a "...and fark y'all."

....ratings through the roooooof!
 
2012-12-04 10:39:47 AM  

xanadian: Unless debt reduction isn't the primary goal, that is.


It's not, deficit reduction is, and depending on what the spending is, it may make sense to stimulate an increase in GDP vice reducing government spending and it's stimulative effects and trying to make up the difference by taxing more too. Nobody's particularly concerned with the absolute magnitude of the numbers (except producers of political ads), it's the ratios, and spending or taxes will affect both sides of the ratio.

Debt reduction would require an actual no-shiat balanced budget, and that's not even under consideration.
 
2012-12-04 10:42:15 AM  

un4gvn666: I posted this yesterday in another thread:

Bullet Points:

1) End Medicare as we know it
2) Convert Medicaid to a block grant, effectively ending Medicaid as we know it
3) Cut compensation for federal employees and cut funding to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

These are the reforms that Republicans believe are "absolutely essential to addressing the true drivers of our debt".

They also outright refuse to accept higher tax rates, "in order to protect small businesses and our economy", instead generating revenue by closing loopholes and deductions, with no details whatsoever.

These clowns need to be smacked down. Really farking hard.


Well, they are right to that health care costs are what is arming the debt bomb over the long term. But they're completely wrong about the solution to defusing the bomb. Unless you want millions of people to just die because they can't afford to see a quality doctor, the government will have to step in to help some people out.
 
2012-12-04 10:43:31 AM  

Serious Black: un4gvn666: I posted this yesterday in another thread:

Bullet Points:

1) End Medicare as we know it
2) Convert Medicaid to a block grant, effectively ending Medicaid as we know it
3) Cut compensation for federal employees and cut funding to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

These are the reforms that Republicans believe are "absolutely essential to addressing the true drivers of our debt".

They also outright refuse to accept higher tax rates, "in order to protect small businesses and our economy", instead generating revenue by closing loopholes and deductions, with no details whatsoever.

These clowns need to be smacked down. Really farking hard.

Well, they are right to that health care costs are what is arming the debt bomb over the long term. But they're completely wrong about the solution to defusing the bomb. Unless you want millions of people to just die because they can't afford to see a quality doctor, the government will have to step in to help some people out.


That was essentially the crux of the most recent election: the government has a role to play in helping people. Obama won that argument, handily. Republicans just don't farking learn. I hope Obama steamrolls 'em.
 
2012-12-04 10:43:57 AM  
Much like Mitt's campaign where he was going to balance the budget without any details as to where the money would come from.
 
2012-12-04 10:43:58 AM  
It's murder and holocaust and slavery and other words that don't make any sense whatsoever.
 
2012-12-04 10:43:59 AM  

Skarekrough: imontheinternet: Rejected by the White House within an hour. I'm really, really starting to like second term Obama.

Wait until he drops the mic at the end of the State Of The Union with a "...and fark y'all."

....ratings through the roooooof!


www.duffyleadership.com

You know what he's saying right now? "That black bastard can't throw me out!" You know where he's saying it? Out in the parking lot.
 
2012-12-04 10:44:14 AM  

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist: So a group of House members that represent districts gerrymandered to represent only yokels, morons, and hill folk, get to determine the future of the country for the rest of the 300 million. Ain't democracy grand?


Luckily, Obama still has to approve the budget. Which gives me a bit of hope.

Not much, though.
 
2012-12-04 10:44:14 AM  
So, their counter offer was to propose what they've been pushing for since 2009 and was soundly rejected by the American people last month?

According to the GOP, the brunt of the costs of recovery should be shouldered by the Middle Classes, the poor, the elderly and the sick while the wealthiest Americans and the very people who caused the financial collapse escape untouched and continue to see their share of the wealth increase. ...and no mention of cuts to the grotesquely bloated defense budgets.

fark these shameless plutocrats.
 
2012-12-04 10:44:39 AM  
Someone educate me. But didn't the republicans repeatedly lambast Obama about cutting 500 million from Medicare(which everyone else agreed was actually a good financial restructuring) and say the first thing they'd do is restore that? And this plan cuts Medicare?
 
2012-12-04 10:45:08 AM  

incendi: Debt reduction would require an actual no-shiat balanced budget, and that's not even under consideration.


THIS.

I find it firghtening that even with ALL the spending cuts and tax hikes, we still wouldn't have a balanced budget. Not even close.
 
2012-12-04 10:45:45 AM  

Cinaed: It's murder and holocaust and slavery and other words that don't make any sense whatsoever. really, really stupid and not helpful at all.


Those words make perfect sense to me.
 
2012-12-04 10:46:39 AM  

Citrate1007: Why is it that if someone takes advantage of a corporate tax/welfare they are a smart businessman, but if someone takes advantage of a food stamp program to feed their child they are a moocher?


Because of the bubble. The fact-bereft bubble. It's how they view the world, black and white.
 
2012-12-04 10:47:58 AM  

LordJiro: It SHOULDN'T be the primary goal. Fixing the American economy and infrastructure should come first, and that costs money. When things are cleaned up, THEN we should worry about the debt.


DING DING DING

We've had increasing debt since forever. But we've only had a massive recession a couple times. Reducing debt is nice, and a laudable goal, but debt-reduction doesn't create jobs or wealth.

Congress needs priorities (other than reelection).
 
2012-12-04 10:48:09 AM  

almandot: Someone educate me. But didn't the republicans repeatedly lambast Obama about cutting 500 million from Medicare(which everyone else agreed was actually a good financial restructuring) and say the first thing they'd do is restore that? And this plan cuts Medicare?


Not "cuts Medicare". It converts Medicare to a voucher program for future retirees, shooting out-of-pocket costs through the roof, and removing the guarantee of health coverage in old age, which is the core of the program. It would effectively kill Medicare.

The voters made it awfully clear they weren't going to have any of this shiat in this past election, but apparently you have to speak really slowly and in small words for Republicans to hear you clearly.
 
2012-12-04 10:49:19 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: During a briefing, senior congressional Republican aides said the proposal is "a fair, middle ground" based on an idea floated during testimony by Erskine Bowles, of the Bowles-Simpson Commission, which the president tasked with finding a long-term solution to the country's debt issue.

Erskine Bowles
While I'm flattered the Speaker would call something "the Bowles plan," the approach outlined in the letter Speaker Boehner sent to the President does not represent the Simpson-Bowles plan, nor is it the Bowles plan. Link


Woof. Talk about a hot potato. And speaking of potato, I hope these guys get a stiff reprimand from their derpstituents in two years.

Double down on the derp, you stupid farks, and let's see how far you get.
 
2012-12-04 10:49:43 AM  

un4gvn666: Serious Black: un4gvn666: I posted this yesterday in another thread:

Bullet Points:

1) End Medicare as we know it
2) Convert Medicaid to a block grant, effectively ending Medicaid as we know it
3) Cut compensation for federal employees and cut funding to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance

These are the reforms that Republicans believe are "absolutely essential to addressing the true drivers of our debt".

They also outright refuse to accept higher tax rates, "in order to protect small businesses and our economy", instead generating revenue by closing loopholes and deductions, with no details whatsoever.

These clowns need to be smacked down. Really farking hard.

Well, they are right to that health care costs are what is arming the debt bomb over the long term. But they're completely wrong about the solution to defusing the bomb. Unless you want millions of people to just die because they can't afford to see a quality doctor, the government will have to step in to help some people out.

That was essentially the crux of the most recent election: the government has a role to play in helping people. Obama won that argument, handily. Republicans just don't farking learn. I hope Obama steamrolls 'em.


You got it. And except for those who are desperately trying to munch on Ayn Rand's rotting corpse of a twat, I think people recognize that having an activist government that intervenes in the economy can actually provide food for a market to grow.
 
2012-12-04 10:50:22 AM  

vernonFL: incendi: Debt reduction would require an actual no-shiat balanced budget, and that's not even under consideration.

THIS.

I find it firghtening that even with ALL the spending cuts and tax hikes, we still wouldn't have a balanced budget. Not even close.


Well, yeah. Economics is referred to as the dismal science for a reason. To boot, Americans really have no clue just how much goddamned money their government spends, per person, on corporate welfare and the military-industrial complex.
 
2012-12-04 10:51:09 AM  
FTFA: "In fact, it actually promises to lower rates for the wealthy and sticks the middle class with the bill. Their plan includes nothing new and provides no details on which deductions they would eliminate, which loopholes they will close or which Medicare savings they would achieve. Independent analysts who have looked at plans like this one have concluded that middle class taxes will have to go up to pay for lower rates for millionaires and billionaires."

/SSDD
 
2012-12-04 10:52:07 AM  

spelletrader: FTFA: "In fact, it actually promises to lower rates for the wealthy and sticks the middle class with the bill. Their plan includes nothing new and provides no details on which deductions they would eliminate, which loopholes they will close or which Medicare savings they would achieve. Independent analysts who have looked at plans like this one have concluded that middle class taxes will have to go up to pay for lower rates for millionaires and billionaires."

/SSDD


I'm all for freedom of speech, but the next politician who says "job creators" ought to get a boot to the head.
 
2012-12-04 10:52:57 AM  

Trivia Jockey: LordJiro: It SHOULDN'T be the primary goal. Fixing the American economy and infrastructure should come first, and that costs money. When things are cleaned up, THEN we should worry about the debt.

DING DING DING

We've had increasing debt since forever. But we've only had a massive recession a couple times. Reducing debt is nice, and a laudable goal, but debt-reduction doesn't create jobs or wealth.

Congress needs priorities (other than reelection).


It's amazing how people who supposedly believe so fervently in the benign wisdom of the free market won't let the free market decide when America has too much debt. Currently, the free market is beating down our doors to buy our T-Bills.
 
2012-12-04 10:54:28 AM  

Trivia Jockey: I'm all for freedom of speech, but the next politician who says "job creators" ought to get a boot to the head.


You're way more lenient than I'd be.

/"job creators" = wealthy should be the biggest lie of the decade
 
2012-12-04 10:55:51 AM  

un4gvn666: Cinaed: It's murder and holocaust and slavery and other words that don't make any sense whatsoever. really, really stupid and not helpful at all.

Those words make perfect sense to me.


It's the position of the GOP/Teabaggers. Of course it isn't helpful. But that's what the Dems and Obama get to negotiate against.
 
2012-12-04 10:57:09 AM  

un4gvn666: /"job creators" = wealthy should be the biggest lie of the decade


That's got to be on the list, for sure. Along with "death panels" and "qualified candidate Sarah Palin".

How many experts and studies, not to mention history, have proven that reducing taxes for the wealthy does. Not. Spur. Economic. Growth. ?
 
2012-12-04 10:57:24 AM  
Please... proceed
howtosavetheworld.ca
 
Bf+
2012-12-04 10:58:07 AM  

un4gvn666: Trivia Jockey: I'm all for freedom of speech, but the next politician who says "job creators" ought to get a boot to the head.

You're way more lenient than I'd be.

/"job creators" = wealthy should be the biggest lie of the decade



I could think of a few jobs they could create:
canesgotosweden.files.wordpress.com
Too far?
 
2012-12-04 10:58:27 AM  

InmanRoshi: Trivia Jockey: LordJiro: It SHOULDN'T be the primary goal. Fixing the American economy and infrastructure should come first, and that costs money. When things are cleaned up, THEN we should worry about the debt.

DING DING DING

We've had increasing debt since forever. But we've only had a massive recession a couple times. Reducing debt is nice, and a laudable goal, but debt-reduction doesn't create jobs or wealth.

Congress needs priorities (other than reelection).

It's amazing how people who supposedly believe so fervently in the benign wisdom of the free market won't let the free market decide when America has too much debt. Currently, the free market is beating down our doors to buy our T-Bills.


That can't be. We're on the verge of bankruptcy and poised to "go Greek". Everyone on Fox News says so.
 
2012-12-04 10:58:46 AM  
So basically, they offered the Romney/Ryan tax plan as their counteroffer then? Didn't the American people recently have a vote on what we thought of that idea?
 
2012-12-04 10:59:30 AM  

almandot: Someone educate me. But didn't the republicans repeatedly lambast Obama about cutting 500 million from Medicare(which everyone else agreed was actually a good financial restructuring) and say the first thing they'd do is restore that? And this plan cuts Medicare?


in the same way obamacare cuts $716 million out of mericare while paul ryan's budget saved $716 million from medicare.
 
2012-12-04 11:00:12 AM  

Bf+: Too far?


Throw in some "freedom fries" and we'll make it a family event.
 
2012-12-04 11:00:59 AM  
Our debt is $16T and growing by $1T per year.

Even if this were to cut $4.6T over ten years, our debt will still balloon to $21.4T. Soooo, we still need a shiatload of magic beans.
 
2012-12-04 11:02:32 AM  
My memory is failing me here...didn't we have a budget surplus not too long ago? What party held the presidency during that time? Anyone?
 
2012-12-04 11:02:35 AM  

Cinaed: un4gvn666: Cinaed: It's murder and holocaust and slavery and other words that don't make any sense whatsoever. really, really stupid and not helpful at all.

Those words make perfect sense to me.

It's the position of the GOP/Teabaggers. Of course it isn't helpful. But that's what the Dems and Obama get to negotiate against.


You know, you're right. And despite how easy they're making it for Obama, I'm still surprised he's come out as aggressively as he has. It's exactly what I voted for this time around.

I don't think we should take it for granted while it's here.
 
Displayed 50 of 130 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report