Where Are Dems Proposed Spending Cuts?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by pspr, Nov 27, 2012.

  1. pspr


    There aren't any real cuts. That's why you don't hear anything about them. They are just calling for tax increases like they did with Reagan and H.W. Bush only to never let any spending cuts they promised to materialize.

    Republicans are being hounded mercilessly to abandon their no-tax pledge to get a deal on the fiscal cliff. So why aren't Democrats facing any pressure to compromise on entitlement spending?

    Every Republican who happens to bump into a reporter these days is sure to be grilled on tax hikes.

    On Sunday's "Meet the Press," to cite just one example, David Gregory pressed Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., repeatedly on the topic. And stories are now rife with claims that Republicans are "softening" on taxes.

    True enough, House Speaker John Boehner has already conceded the point about the need for more "revenues," and several GOP senators and congressmen have publicly broken away from their no-new-tax pledge.

    But while GOP leaders have been signaling a willingness to cut a deal — even if it means agreeing to some form of tax hike — Democrats are digging in against any meaningful changes to out-of-control entitlement programs.

    House leader Nancy Pelosi says she'll resist any attempts to pare back Social Security or Medicare. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared emphatically that "I am not going to be part of having Social Security as part of these talks."

    And Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said over the weekend that Democrats had to "put everything on the table," then immediately took Social Security off the table, saying (falsely) that it's not contributing a dime to the debt.

    Meanwhile, Obama refuses to put a leash on liberal groups who've pledged to fight against any entitlement changes. Union groups are already mounting a six-figure ad campaign to pressure key Democrats.

    And, naturally, the same mainstream press that's pushing Republicans to abandon conservative principles has put no pressure whatsoever on Democrats to reject the big-spending, left-wing extremists in their party.

    The topic never came up when ABC News talked to Pelosi over the prior weekend. David Gregory didn't ask Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., a single question about spending cuts on "Meet the Press," although he talked a lot about tax hikes. George Stephanopoulos managed to eke out just one question on entitlement legislation amid a torrent on the GOP's tax pledge.

    As anyone who's studied the federal budget knows, the problem isn't too little taxes. Even if we kept all the Bush tax cuts in place, federal revenues as a share of GDP will soon exceed historic averages.

    The problem is entirely on the spending side, where entitlement programs, which now include ObamaCare, will push federal spending up to 24% of GDP and rising.

    Which means it isn't the Republicans' tax pledge that should be the subject of public outrage; it's the Democrats' refusal to abandon their big-spending ways.

  2. exGOPer



  3. pspr


    As expected, Obama just announced that he wants to get the tax increases on the wealthy ($250k) done before the end of the year and work on the spending cuts next year.

    What a load of crap. Republicans better not fall for this lie.
  4. Dear Leader Obama about to crush the economy, and what will we get in return? A long line at the doctors office for less care. Other than that...nada.

    About 40 million Americans in the lowest fifth of the economy would see take-home income fall 3.7 percent. Taxpayers in the top fifth of the economy would see a 7.7 percent drop. Middle income tax payers would see take-home income fall by 4.4 percent.

    Fiscal Cliff Changes in Take-Home Pay

    Percent or Dollars

    Lowest quintile

    -3.7% or $412

    Second quintile

    -4.5% or $1,231

    Middle quintile

    -4.4% or $1,984

    Fourth quintile

    -5.1% or $3,540

    Top quintile

    -7.7% or $14,173


    -6.2% or $3,446

    The tax changes hit Americans from all angles. The biggest hit is from the expiration of the Bush-era tax cuts, but there are also Obama-era tax cuts and credits that expire.

    There will be tax penalties for married couples and for families with children. And the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax is in the mix, which would increase taxes for 22 million people.

    So income taxes would go up, payroll taxes would go up, and estate taxes and dividend taxes would go up.

    And there is a new tax to pay for the Affordable Care Act.

  5. wildchild


    Why do you think Obama actually wants to avoid the fiscal cliff?

    What does it entail?

    Getting rid of the Bush Tax Cuts, and huge cuts to defense. This is a liberals dream.

  6. "If there is a silver lining, the federal government would bring in an extra $536 billion in 2013 to use for deficit reduction. About 54 percent of that money would come from ending the Bush-era tax cuts and from new payroll taxes. "
  7. +1 ,beat me to it.Obama isnt a liberal though. Obama is to moderate to allow the tax cuts on the middle class to end.He might let the deadline hit then force a vote on the middle class cuts only and dare the republicans to vote against it
  8. wildchild


    No it wouldn't.
  9. I haven't done the math to agree or dispute .That quote is from CO's link
  10. wildchild


    You are right, I slipped up and used the bogus term that the media uses. Obama is not a liberal. He is an authoritarian leftist.

    To describe Obama as a moderate is the most laughable thing I have heard all day.
    #10     Nov 28, 2012