Showing that he's finally getting serious about America's debt crisis, Barack Obama submitted his $3.7 trillion dollar budget yesterday while wearing his frowny face. While many Republicans suggested that the president might seem more serious if he actually proposed significant spending cuts, the Whitehouse was quick to point out that thousands of frowny faces caused the government to fall in Egypt, and so it's at least plausible that a similar strategy could cause our debt to fall.
In fairness, the president's budget did contain some specific cost-cutting measures. For example, there is no funding proposed for a return of the Presidential Debt Reduction Commission, who recently said that the federal budget needs at least four times the spending cuts that Mr. Obama is currently proposing.
Among the additional cuts actually suggested by Mr. Obama is reduced funding for home heating for the poor, presumably under the expectation that if Republicans vote for it they'll look like cruel bastards, and if they don't vote for it they'll seem like complete hypocrites. Moreover, freezing people look great on television, and will make taxpayers feel really guilty about the whole "cost cutting" thing.
Of course, what the president lacks in boldness when it comes to spending cuts is more than made up for by his enthusiastic willingness to raise taxes...by as much as $1.5 trillion in 10 years. Mr. Obama suggests raising taxes on the nation's top earners, raising the capital gains tax (which will discourage investment in business), raising the "death tax," reducing deductions for charitable donations, and creating energy taxes which will decrease hiring while raising consumer prices. Ouch.
The submission of the president's budget is expected to be only the first shot in a contentious battle over the nation's faltering economy and unsustainable debt levels. A battle that must finally be fought, because America is living on borrowed time. Or would be, if we had any credit left.
-
Hopey changey ain't cheap is it.
ReplyDeleteIf the Republicans are too timid to tackle entitlements, there's no point in arguing over any of it. They will put on a show and kick the can down the road...as usual. If any of them even consider a budget that exceeds projected revenues, they are guilty of rank cowardice, and worse, treason.
ReplyDeleteIf the Government got out of everything they aren't supposed to be doing anyway, we would have a budget surplus and actually be able to pay down the debt. The interest on that debt for 2010 was $413,954,825,362.17 (yes, that's almost $414 Billion). Already in FY 2011 (4 months down) it is at $169 Billion) … from www.treasurydirect.gov. And they are crowing about cutting $100B from the budget!?! Obviously, one way to cut over $400 Billon from the budget would be to pay off the debt! That interest money is money down the drain. It does nothing at all for the American people and mostly benefits, yes, our adversaries.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how hard it is to cut funding to all the zillions of countries we are bribing (including Mexico?! Egypt?! China?!?!?!) and crack down on welfare fraud and low income housing fraud and that should give just enough extra money to cut taxes on businesses so they can create more jobs so then there will be savings on unemployment and...
ReplyDeleteOh, never mind.
Let Obama play chicken with the GOP. If the GOP wimps (like usual) it will only make the Tea Party/Libertarian influence even more passionate and stronger.
ReplyDeleteAngry Hoosier Dad & John the Econ- A huge problem is that what needs to be done is massive cuts across the board, including entitlements. But the Republicans have no ability to enact such cuts without the support of the Democrat Senate and president. So if the GOP takes a strong stand for the cuts now, the Dems will have a field day scaring everyone, and 2012 will see Obama back in the Whitehouse (and possibly with a supermajority again).
ReplyDeleteBut let's say there's a Republican supermajority in 2012. Would they then have the courage to make the kinds of cuts which have caused rioting in other countries? Frankly, I doubt it.
We've reached a crisis point in which the majority of voters are going to be against taking the only measures which can ensure the survival of the nation. Sadly, this means I can't foresee any lasting solutions coming out of the ballot box - but the alternatives are terrifying.
I have noticed ONE common thread in all of the budgeting proposals, and all the "suggestions" for curing the fiduciary problems of our geat country. Or should I say the common thread is actually A LACK of it, that is common throughout ... NOT ONE committee, organizations, party, group, from ANY side has actively tried to reduce the spending where it will hurt the least amount of people. That is the administration of EVERY department, program, level of government. A very old saying says it best "We have far too many chiefs, and not nearly enough Indians".
ReplyDeleteWhen we talk about government fiscal responsibility, let's NOT start laying off those folks at the bottom of the income ladder who are actually accoml;ishing something ... lets start removing the dead weight in the higher eschelons ... less actual people will be affected, for enormously higher wages and benefits saved! WHY is no one talking about this? The first thing a goiverrnment does when they have a budget crunch is ... layopff police and firemen. The first thing the feds bring up ... every time is ... no raises for the military, cut medicare, social security and welfare. I agree the last ones DO NEED a lot of work - but it needs to be a haircut for the organizations, not a pedicure extending up to the ankles!
Stilton:
ReplyDeletePeople are already scared...and broke and unemployed. How much more will the truth frighten them? I am not convinced that standing on principle and for realistic measures will automatically get Jug-ears reelected with a Dem supermajority in 2012. We need to have faith in our fellow citizens that they can handle the truth. This isn't France after all.
I think the best we can hope for is for the House to push the Socialist in Chief as far as possible, but that is not going to be far because he still has a majority in the Senate. I am afraid we are pretty much stuck with slightly less rampant tax and spend for two more miserable years, and then we can only hope for some serious slashing of black hole money pits like the Dept. of Energy. I just pray that: A) we can elect a true American President in 2012, B) we can put the House AND Senate in the hands of some gutsy anti-socialists like Rand Paul in 2012, and C) the Representatives and Senators who rode the Tea Party horse in 2010 actually REMEMBER why we elected them two years down the road.
ReplyDeleteThis is a tall order, so we MUST remain vigilant!! BO is trying hard to appear conservative. Lets not let him pull a Bill Clinton in 2012.
Chuck, wayyyyy BITD (Bush 1, I think?) Martin Gross wrote a book 'Government Waste, A to Z' that doc'd that a full 25% of the budget could be eliminated, and NO one (well, almost no one) would even NOTICE....
ReplyDeleteAngry Hoosier Dad: our fellow citizens elected this least-qualified of candidates in the first place, so I don't have a lot of faith there. Everyone agrees there needs to be cuts, but nobody wants those things cut that affect them.
ReplyDeletePete(Detroit): not familiar with the work... I'll have to look into it. Was that 25% of the budget, or 25% of the government? Must be budget, because I'm betting that way more than 25% of government could be cut without any detrimental effect (or notice). We could start with the departments of Education and Energy ... both worse than useless.
I can think of dozens of gubba-mint pro-grahms that could be cut to the bone to save money... Top of the list; Term limits for all politicos with a major a reduction in salary and an end to their lifetime benefits & perks. An end to useless departments like Education & Energy (as mentioned above). And stop making it so profitable to have illegitimate chir-runs an git on de well-fair.
ReplyDeleteChuck:
ReplyDeleteI understand your point and would only argue that, despite the electorate's responsibility to educate themselves - yes, they failed miserably at that - they relied on the media to do their job and inform them of this Obama character. Of course the media both lied and actively hid the truth to get their chosen one elected. The electorate has learned a bitter lesson and I don't think they will forget so quickly or be conned again so easily. At least I pray they are not. If Obama is reelected in 2012 and holds the Senate, well...it will take more than blog posts to save the republic.
I agree with Suzy & don’t forget all subsidies and organizations that have nothing to do with running the Gov (Acorn, Planned Parenthood, NPR, Endowment of the Arts, etc)
ReplyDeleteOther than the greatest Military in the world (along with the FBI, CIA, FDA, CDC, etc) to keep us safe…
On a daily basis, what do we get from the Gov? Infrastructure, but, we pay about $.49 per gallon at the pump in taxes for those roads. Seriously, if the Fed Govt was shutdown: how long would it take to really notice?
If we could get all the illegals to go home think of the $$ we would save in the schools, hospitals, jails, prisons, welfare & maybe even create some jobs for Americans along the way.
Yes: Doc No. Nev – cut out some middle mgrs. There’s so many ways we could save $$; don’t you wish you could get ahold of the budget & a couple cases of red markers & go at it?