The point is that it's not credible. Tell me, what do you do with people you work with who propose "solutions" that either solve nothing or only nibble at the problem?
The point is that the rabid republicans have always been war-mongers. They are the ones who have always maintained that we need to INCREASE the military budget. So it is rather in-credible to see them propose that military spending be axed to cut the deficit. In my opinion, they would much prefer to throw the poor and the disabled in front of an oncoming train than to slash the defense spending.
Lobbies starting huge media campaign against Rand Paul fight against pork. At first glance I missed the 20B cut in foreign aid, it's so hidden and tiny. This 500 B proposal is too small, let's support it and approve it ASAP, in the meantime let's keep looking for another 500B wasteful pork to cut. LOL, OK so let's renege instead on "commitments" to murderous dictatorships like Mubarak's. Btw, since when has the US a "commitment" to any foreign country, democracy or not? A 1.5T deficit means either these "commitments" have to be scraped, or, raise US taxes, which means taking money from US citizens to finance foreign wars, with no benefit whatsoever to the american public. If anything, it drags americans into whatever their fight is, putting a huge bull's eye on their backs. Whatever these countries problems are, americans have their own now, and cannot keep giving money away. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...ZhQUvg?docId=0a3ffc614297492fadccbeb481ba1388 GOP senator favors cutting US aid to Israel (AP) â 1 day ago WASHINGTON (AP) â Tea party-backed Republican Sen. Rand Paul favors cutting U.S. aid to Israel as part of a deficit-driven effort to slash government spending by $500 billion this year, drawing criticism from Democrats and Republicans who argue the U.S. must be unwavering in its support for the longtime Mideast ally. (...) "We share Senator Paul's commitment to restraining the growth of federal spending, but we reject his misguided proposal to end U.S. assistance to our ally Israel," said Matthew Brooks, executive director for the Republican Jewish Coalition, in a statement Thursday. The organization counts several former senior Bush administration officials on its board of directors. Rep. Nita Lowey of the New York, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees foreign aid, said the United States cannot renege on its commitment to the only Democratic nation in a dangerous region. "Using our budget deficit as a reason to abandon Israel is inexcusable," Lowey said in a statement. "It is unclear to me whether Rand Paul speaks for the tea party, the Republican Party or simply himself. I call on all those who value the U.S.-Israel relationship to make it clear that our nation will not abandon our ally Israel." The United States has stood staunchly with Israel for decades, through various governments in Washington and Jerusalem. The United States and Israel signed a memorandum of understanding several years ago to ensure Israel's military edge in the region. Under the agreement, Israel received $2.8 billion in U.S. dollars in the last fiscal year and is slated to get $3 billion in the current year. The agreement calls for $3.1 billion in U.S. funds to Israel over a five-year period beginning with the next budget. Last November, Vice President Joe Biden met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and told the Jewish Federation of North America that the Obama administration "represents an unbroken chain in American leaders who have understood this critical strategic relationship.". (...)
It's more credible than finger crossing and hoping the problem will go itself away. We all agree Rand Paul proposal is too small, but look how much interest group opposition it has generated already. Imagine all the lobbysts howling if he proposes to cut the deficit NOW = 1.5 trillion in expenses per year. Goverment expense cutting needs to start ASAP, Paul's program is a small but needed first step.
Even if his bill passes, we end up with ANOTHER $TRILLION in deficit spending... and another next year... yada, yada, yada. In a few years, the world cries BULLSHIT on US's money.. and WE ALL LOSE EVERYTHING. Is THAT the better solution? I say... 1. BALANCED BUDGET NOW! 2. NO INCREASE IN DEBT CEILING. We'll cope.
Look how interest groups lobbysts are opposing Rand Paul tiny 500B bill, imagine what the opposition would be if he proposes to balance the budget now. I say support it and approve it ASAP, and in the meantime find another 500B to cut. In 4-5 years, budget is balanced. Mission accomplished.
That's all the proposed plan does. It does not solve *anything* - it carefully avoids dealing with any of the fundamental issues - all it does is target institutions in a politically heavy-handed manner. The day he (also) proposes cutting the defense budget by 40% and raising the SS age by 10 years is the day he deserves to be taken seriously. But it'll be a cold day in hell before he does that, because the Congressman doesn't give two shits about the deficit, he's simply laying the groundwork for his re-election campaign. Or to put in in ET language - he's selling his own flavor of koolaid.
One of the most insightful posts I've ever read. So, iow, once we went "global", our economic model doesn't hold. Interesting.