the way I see it.. the only reason (besides not crossing the point of no return) we are not Greece is because we can print our own $$ and they can't print their own Euro's. The member nations of the EU wouldn't agree to lend to Greece because they don't see the ability for Greece to pay them back or ever get out of debt. So the conditions became CUT SPENDING. Here we are printing (and borrowing) but if that money goes into circulation, which it isn't, our purchasing power would get smashed. We are not too deep in the hole, we aren't Greece, but we are headed that way. Our credit has been downgraded and nothing is being done by obama or congress to fix or even alleviate the mounting debt. Obama's plan to get out of the recession was to spend more lol, he also instituted a new entitlement program which we don't know the actual cost of yet.. so don't say he has done anything about the debt or deficit. Bottom line, we need to cut spending before we become Greece.
I'm not going to say that Obama didn't do the things you mentioned in your OP. But they are token achievements that had no effect on anything, either by design, or because they were so insignificant to the massive problem they are trying to combat. It would be like trying to conserve water during a drought by drinking one less glass of water every day, but then being ok with washing your car and watering the lawn again.
Okay, so where do we start cutting? Who will do it? Touch Medicare or Medicaid, and you will be surrounded by a hostile congress and you will be a one termer. That is why I take these political arguments lightly. Long ago I saw that no one has the political will. Something really bad is going to have to happen to us before we to decide to balance the books, just my take.
You nailed it. Someone must run who is ok with being a 1 term-er because the country needs it. Without it, the system will not change until it destructs. Forced change will occur, it is a mathematical certainty.
Look, as I told Piggy. Who is going to do this, Mittens? Mittens is a paleo-liberal...you know it, I know it, the GOP knows, the GOP base knows it. If he becomes President, he will remember what the GOP did to him. They know it. That is why I have said that I won't be mad if Mittens is President. I will even go so far as to say he will not repeal the ACA in toto. He is the Grandfather of it, and he has said he is pround of that, before his handlers got to him. His dad was a paleo-liberal as well. He is so disjointed however that he cannot win. Which is why I said I will be done at ET if he does win. But I digress, who will solve this problem Tsing? Piggy? Who has the stones to do it?
Ron Paul would, but that isn't going to happen. The reason I side with Romney is because he is smart enough (or claims he is) to know what to do in regards to the Fed. I saw an article that mentioned possible Fed substitutes for Bernanke that Romney would choose from. They were John Taylor (The Taylor Rule), Jim Grant and a few others I don't know a whole lot about, but know they aren't uber doves like Bernanke. The same article listed possible followups to Bernanke if Obama won and Bernanke didn't accept a third term - they were Larry Summers (OMG really? Have we learned nothing?) and Yellen (wtf, if there is a dove that is worse than Bernanke, it is her) and other lunatics. So I'm really voting for changes in the Fed, not as much as the stupidity in the White house, which is likely to remain dumb across the board regardless of who gets there.