Drama monger!
@OpinionatedLady (5965)
United States
February 28, 2013 10:45pm CST
This article I know is one sided but an interesting read. It goes over how Obama and his people are inflating the circumstances of the looming sequester. I checked out the numbers on another site or two and though they are all a little different they are not different by that much and the numbers in this article seem to be mid range between them all. There is one part though that sticks in my head and I quote , "Because of this year’s payroll tax increase, millions of American workers have had to tighten their belts by precisely 2?percent. They found a way. Washington, spending $3.8?trillion, cannot?"
Thoughts anyone?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-hail-armageddon/2013/02/28/ca8a32a6-81da-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html
4 people like this
6 responses
@Hatley (163776)
• Garden Grove, California
1 Mar 13
hik opinionatedlady why sure hire one of us women who have to tighten our belts and let us put congress and the president on a
budget and we would soon have the debt down by trillions of dollars too.We would get the US out of debt.
@celticeagle (166761)
• Boise, Idaho
1 Mar 13
I think that Obama was put into office to actually bring the government to a screeching hault and obviously he is doing a good job of it. Let the people think he is a wonder God and can do no wrong. Yes, please put him in office! We need such as him. Bull! We need him like a heart attack. Idiocy personified.
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
1 Mar 13
And he doesn't have to worry about another election does he? Already talk amongst some to give him another term though. ???
2 people like this
@OpinionatedLady (5965)
• United States
3 Mar 13
we have laws against more then two terms let us all pray that they are upheld!
1 person likes this
@laglen (19759)
• United States
1 Mar 13
Well, the deadline has gone. Now we have to watch where they will take these cuts. These cuts can be moved around and quite simply, the could easily make these cuts simply in waste. Now tackle the fraud and abuse, we are talking big money saved.
Poor guys, they may have to do their job after all.
@AidaLily (1450)
• United States
1 Mar 13
The only issue I see with that considering you are right and they could choose to move the cuts around properly, is that they will upset people lobbying them and you know how terrible that would be. *hints of sarcasm in that last bit*
They could tackle fraud and abuse but what would they go after? Would they go after the couples who are retired, have more than enough for their retirement saved but still collect SS? Would they go after the few people who sign up for welfare, have no children, but literally just don't want to work? Would they go after businesses using shady practices or what one might find to be unethical like my sister's job that lays off all employees for two months at the end of the year and makes their employees sign up for unemployment and/or public assistance if needed? What about the people still involved in near predatory lending practices? Professional students who have degrees but since they can't get a job in some off the wall field continue to get student loans in order to live because of it and go back to school? Would they go after the non-profits who are profiting off donations? Would they go after people who take deductions that don't legally apply?
They could make cuts in defense and try to add more to education so perhaps public schools can add real world work like classes or colleges for that matter. The could cut back on welfare but still make insurance affordable for everyone even with pre-existing issues. They could move the cuts around to take out some of their research budgets and much more. Will they?
Probably not. As you said, they all might have to work after all and we can't have our politicians working. Oh the horror!
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
1 Mar 13
Remember when he said, no...PROMISED, he would NOT RAISE TAXES ON THE MIDDLE CLASS?
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
6 Mar 13
Bush cut social security taxes...we paid LESS to FICA. Obama let them (Bush tax cuts) lapse, AND added a tax hike in the form of Obamacare as well as other tax hikes that effect the middle class.
@OpinionatedLady (5965)
• United States
3 Mar 13
But deb it's not his tax raises they are Bushes fault aren't they?
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
1 Mar 13
There are a few journalist coming out with reports of the White House intimidating them about their reporting on this.
Bob Woodward, the journalist who brought down Nixon was the first. He reports he was told by a White House senior staffer that he'd regret his remarks. Then, Lanny Davis said the same thing. Now there is a third, Ron Fournier from AP said he was told to stop reporting on the President's remarks.
I think Obama thought he could lie about this being the Republican's baby and no one would say a word.
There was a leaked memo about 'eviserating' the Republican party, was this an attempt to make them the scapegoat for Obama's sequestration, the gutting of the military budget?
1 person likes this
@OpinionatedLady (5965)
• United States
3 Mar 13
I think the Democrats are sore that the media is beginning to not bow down to them anymore... or perhaps that more people are paying attention to those reporters calling them out.
@AidaLily (1450)
• United States
1 Mar 13
They aren't the only ones.
When will people wake up and stop thinking choosing a side would've made things better or the other side isn't as bad. Please. The republican leaders have inflated this as well scaring people and calling it Obama's sequester and all.
They act like it is the first time this was ever brought up and it is all the Obama administrations fault and blah blah. Just like the administration is blaming republicans.
Call it my opinion if you still have complete and total faith in your leaders but:
Both sides wanted this. They could have done something. They could have stopped having press conferences, not gone on vacation, etc. They could have both stopped playing the blame game to make their party lines see the other as bad. They could have worked together to figure out a deal. They both could stop spending ridiculously and come up with a budget and a vast majority of them voted for this.
These are not the Republican or Democratic parties people used to support and be proud of supporting. Since perhaps 2000 but I think further back then that, they have morphed into "grown men" on preschool playground trying to blame the other for something they've done wrong. My 6 and 4 year olds act a lot better than they do, have been saving all of their money (tooth fairy, christmas, etc.) and they are children. If my children can do it then about 535 members of congress and the senate plus the president and vice president can do it but they don't want to.
If people had to tighten their belts for a whole 2%, why can't Washington cut back on 3.8 trillion in spending?
Find and compare all the numbers. This country spends a crap load on welfare BUT just not what you are thinking struggling families and a literal few drops in the bucket of welfare abusers.
We have foreign aid which might as well be welfare to people that hate us.
We have corporate aid aka welfare for "too big to fail" and normal sized businesses.
We have special interests groups who love to spend a little to get a nice little pay back in the form of many different things in depending on which members of the congress and senate they are complaining about. They add a few of those things to every last bill they pass.
~
I have to agree with a random post I saw somewhere from an independent voter such as myself - If it were their perks, salaries, bank accounts and any excess money they get from lobbying, insider trading, etc. on the line then they would have budgets done and perfectly balanced within a week.
However, that is not on the line and was never on the line. Only the lower and middle class are the ones suffering.
Those who are much better off are not suffering. If I had 10 million in the bank and only made an income of 100,000 last year, then all my taxes are on my income of $100,000 not the stores of money I have in the bank unless I was paid interest on them.
As a disclaimer since I know someone will want to harp on my reference of people being better off not suffering and say I am jealous of the rich, I am really not. Personally, I don't want to worry about looking over my shoulder to wonder if someone is going to sue me, find a way to manipulate me to placing them into my will, try to "hook up" with me for money or anything like that. Sounds boring to be honest. I want something I have to keep working towards. A goal. A perfect place in my head rather than having everything on a silver platter and letting my children become spoiled with no work ethic but getting hired because of my connections. It seems idealistic to want something that simple in a time where everyone is getting greedier and greedier but meh sometimes I am a simplistic person.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
1 Mar 13
I'm no big fan of some, no - most of the Republicans these days...but the Republican controled House had THREE reps write BUDGETS that Harry Reid simply REFUSED to even allow debate on.
The Democrats absolutely REFUSED to cut anything when aksing for the debt ceiling to be raised.
A few Republicans listed ALL of the waste within the Federal government and published it in book form...NO DEMOCRAT will consider even looking at it. It's a pretty thick book! Guess none of them can lift it.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
3 Mar 13
It IS Obama's sequester. He wasn't forced to sign it, and the Republicans WANT spending cuts, what's wrong with wanting spending cuts? It is the Republicans who are wishy washy, wanting to sit on the fence that I'm mad at. Say it loud and proud, we need to CUT SPENDING!