by Sixstrings » Mon 01 Aug 2011, 02:15:37
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ell here's Boehner's "compromise"; what it does is:
Lie once again about "cutting spending." It does no such thing. It increases spending - every year. Bogus and outright-fraudulent "baseline budgeting" means that if
they intended to boost spending $300 billion but only increase it $200, that's a $100 billion "cut." If you ran your household like this you'd be broke in a week. For the US, it will take a bit longer.
No tax increases. That's nice, but let's not forget that while the Democrats scream about the "Bush Tax Cuts" the FICA tax cut was theirs. Obama signed it. You cannot keep reducing income and increasing spending forever.
The cuts, fraudulent though they are, aren't even real anyway - and not binding either. There's nothing before 2013, which means a downgrade is almost certain. Further, raising the debt ceiling now for the whole among but allegedly finding the "cuts" over 10 years is an outright fraud by a ratio of 10:1.
A 2013 timeline for actual changes means nothing, since the next Congress is not bound by what this one does. Period.
Sequesterization didn't work in 1997. It won't work in 2011 either.
We failed to get to $4 trillion. That's what S&P said they needed, and they said they needed to see that within the next three years. Now we find out if S&P has any balls.
We also get to find out if the so-called "Tea Party" is worthy of the name. Yeah, I posted that my opinions change when facts do, and they appeared to.
Boehner needs to be ejected from Congress in the next election, and the remaining "mainstream" Republicans must go with him, along with any claiming to be "Tea Partiers" who vote for this abortion.
All of them.
In the meantime, kill this bill and by doing so balance the budget in three days.
http://market-ticker.org/Well I like this debt deal. It's a brilliant piece of work that looks like it means something but really doesn't. Everybody claims victory, everyone's happy.
If there ever are Medicare cuts from the Super Congress special committee, from what I read it will come from the provider side. That's fair. Doctors can afford it more than their patients can.
EDIT: If the Super Dedooper Congress special joint committee / star chamber can't agree on what to cut.. then a trigger happens and automatic big cuts apply to Medicare and Defense (18% per year for defense

). Though as KD points out, they really aren't cuts but rather slowing the rate of growth. Also it's apparent that the Bush tax cuts will be expiring for good (a good thing, I really don't want to pay more but the country is imploding here we must do something).
Moderate cuts to education.. like 20% from student loans, no biggee there ain't no jobs nohow why all the college? It's a waste.
What is most interesting are these really big defense cuts. There's no way the right wing will support this.. my prediction is the defense cut portion will be dropped.
What's most likely to happen is that the super congress special committee won't be able to agree either and the next Congress will just ignore this whole thing rather than allow the triggers to ever go in effect. From a liberal perspective, they should stand firm demanding the trigger on defense spending stay in the bill -- that's the only leverage liberals will have to force compromise with Repubs in the new Super Dedooper Congress special committee.