keepthefaith Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 (edited) would you evaluate a business by its interest expense independent of its income? Would a bank? An investor? If you want to fix the discussion to your bias beforehand, that's up to you. Everyone else pays interest from their income. Sure I understand that. I also understand that a business with more than 10% of its' revenue in interest payments is in a lousy position. Sure I understand that the economy (hopefully) will grow and so will tax receipts. I don't see any bias in my question. I think it's quite probable that 20 years from now our debt expense could be over $1T and reaching 20% of tax receipts. Edited December 12, 2013 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Most Americans polled do not want SS or Medicare cut, and perfer not to see big cuts in Military spending. Without addressing those the balanced budget talk is useless... we will continue to spend, borrow to make up the difference and keep the guise of low taxes for Americans until the point that interest expense forces us to default or kick people off programs or cut Defense dramatically. I think it was George Will on one of the Sunday morning politics show who said something roughly: American Govt does Comprehensive Poorly, but Handles Crisis Effectively. We will deal with the debt when it is in crisis mode, no sooner IMHO I'll have to be convinced that a balanced budget will require cutting military, medicare, or social security when there are so many other things upon which we spend our money. social security is a whole other issue, because of how many people get assistance from it that aren't retirees, not to mention all the baby boomers facing retirement, so something will need to be done ro reign it in, but nobody dares do so. waste is a huge issue in Washington, and nobody is incented to reduce their spending because they'll receive smaller budgets if they do. or why do we need the department of health, education, and welfare when all the states have their own education systems, health boards, and welfare systems already in place? taking an objective look at everything the feds are into, I suspect there are many things that we could get by just fine without. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Pelosi on budget deal: ‘Embrace the suck’ WASHINGTON – It’s not exactly a ringing endorsement of the budget deal. “Embrace the suck,” House minority leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi told fellow Democrats Thursday morning, a source told Politico. “We need to get this off the table so we can go forward,” she added. It’s a way of telling her colleagues the budget deal negotiated with Republicans is the best they can get. Democrats are fuming that the bipartisan budget deal doesn’t extend unemployment benefits for more than a million Americans. One of Pelosi’s top lieutenants, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said Thursday it was “too early to say” whether most Democrats would back the deal, in an appearance on the Bill Press show. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 .Embrace the suck" ... Pelosi told fellow Democrats ... Hasn't she been offering that and haven't they been doing that since 2007? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Hasn't she been offering that and haven't they been doing that since 2007? Well in fairness, they have to pass the suck before they can know what they're embracing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 One of Pelosi’s top lieutenants, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, Really, it would be more accurate to call Van Hollen one of her "caporegimes." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share Posted December 13, 2013 House passes deal http://www.politico.com/story/2013/12/house-budget-deal-vote-101091.html?hp=t2_3 "The deal sets discretionary spending at $1.012 trillion for the current fiscal year — a level that will rise to $1.014 trillion in fiscal 2015 — and replaces sequester cuts slated to take effect in January with more targeted spending cuts. Absent the agreement, discretionary spending would decline to $967 billion early next year with a large proportion of the cuts hitting the Pentagon." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 House passes deal http://www.politico....91.html?hp=t2_3 "The deal sets discretionary spending at $1.012 trillion for the current fiscal year — a level that will rise to $1.014 trillion in fiscal 2015 — and replaces sequester cuts slated to take effect in January with more targeted spending cuts. Absent the agreement, discretionary spending would decline to $967 billion early next year with a large proportion of the cuts hitting the Pentagon." I am honestly surprised. This is going to be generally perceived as a big win for Ryan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share Posted December 13, 2013 me·di·a /ˈmēdēə/ noun noun: media; plural noun: media; noun: the media You're an idiot. You act like we live in a Soviet State the way you talk about "The Media" You are the moron that is always screaming like a retard that the refs are unfair. I am honestly surprised. This is going to be generally perceived as a big win for Ryan. I dunno, kind of like when the garbage men go on strike, when it's over people are just glad it's over but there are no heroes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 You act like we live in a Soviet State the way you talk about "The Media" You are the moron that is always screaming like a retard that the refs are unfair. It's adorable when you try (and fail) to sound like you're not a total cretin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 It's adorable when you try (and fail) to sound like you're not a total cretin. In truth, he's not a total cretin. He's just a troll most of the time. When he sets aside the trolling he's...well, a partial cretin. But not total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 In truth, he's not a total cretin. He's just a troll most of the time. When he sets aside the trolling he's...well, a partial cretin. But not total. Sounds like he's growing on you. They sell anti-fungal creams for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 Sounds like he's growing on you. They sell anti-fungal creams for that. Is THAT the itching between my toes? I thought it was athlete's foot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share Posted December 13, 2013 It's adorable when you try (and fail) to sound like you're not a total cretin. So is the media against your side or not? Seems like you are saying so. Attacking me instead of defending your position is a dodge stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 So is the media against your side or not? Seems like you are saying so. Attacking me instead of defending your position is a dodge stupid. What is a dodge stupid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 What is a dodge stupid? He types with his nose. Cut him some slack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 In truth, he's not a total cretin. He's just a troll most of the time. When he sets aside the trolling he's...well, a partial cretin. But not total. He's 99.97% cretin. Stop splitting hairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 (edited) I'll have to be convinced that a balanced budget will require cutting military, medicare, or social security when there are so many other things upon which we spend our money. social security is a whole other issue, because of how many people get assistance from it that aren't retirees, not to mention all the baby boomers facing retirement, so something will need to be done ro reign it in, but nobody dares do so. waste is a huge issue in Washington, and nobody is incented to reduce their spending because they'll receive smaller budgets if they do. or why do we need the department of health, education, and welfare when all the states have their own education systems, health boards, and welfare systems already in place? taking an objective look at everything the feds are into, I suspect there are many things that we could get by just fine without. well, Medicare/Welfare and SS are mandatory spending, so you can't change outlays on those without law chabges that would reform them and change the fiscal outlays. that leave discretionary spending which is 31% of the Federal Budget and that includes Miltary (which is 57% of that piece), Education, Agriculture, Housing, etc. The other is 7% tha in interest in the debt, which to me is mandatory spending (though some may argue perhaps not). So it is pretty easy to conclude that you need to cut outlays in SS, Healthcare of Miltary to have a shot at hitting a balanced budget based on current tax receipts, and the threshold of what Americans are wiling to pay in taxes. Edited December 13, 2013 by B-Large Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 (edited) well, Medicare/Welfare and SS are mandatory spending, so you can't change outlays on those without law chabges that would reform them and change the fiscal outlays. that leave discretionary spending which is 31% of the Federal Budget and that includes Miltary (which is 57% of that piece), Education, Agriculture, Housing, etc. The other is 7% tha in interest in the debt, which to me is mandatory spending (though some may argue perhaps not). So it is pretty easy to conclude that you need to cut outlays in SS, Healthcare of Miltary to have a shot at hitting a balanced budget based on current tax receipts, and the threshold of what Americans are wiling to pay in taxes. Totally untrue. It can all be accomplished by unitary executive decee. The next President can simply dictate, from his podium, or if he doesn't have time for that, issue edict via conference call, that he has made changes to those laws implementation. Edited December 13, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 Eliminate the Department of Education and the Department of Energy for a start. They've done nothing since they've been created. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts