Democrats & Liberals Archives

Senate Passes Budget Resolution

Earlier this morning, the Senate passed a budget resolution, the first such resolution since the rise of the Tea Party.

Republican intransigence and filibuster abuse had prevented the Senate from passing a budget resolution the last few years, but negotiations earlier this year regarding the "fiscal cliff" and debt ceiling increase paved the way for today's simple majority vote.

Conservatives have claimed that the lack of a Senate budget resolution was evidence that Obama and other Democrats were not interested in negotiation or compromise. Although this argument was absurd from its inception, the Senate has now undermined its premise. However, I doubt conservatives will follow their own logic and take the budget resolution as evidence that Obama and the Democrats are willing to negotiate and compromise.

In any case, the Senate accomplished nothing today. The resolution is nonbinding and any appropriations bills must garner support from both houses of Congress as well as the President. Now, House Republicans need to sit down with Obama and find a solution to our financial woes. However, this was also the case yesterday; so I safely conclude that today's budget vote was simply a sham. The only purpose of the exercise was to put on a show whereby conservatives could offer one ridiculous non-germane amendment after another only to see them defeated.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0323/Senate-s-first-budget-in-four-years-A-chip-off-partisan-gridlock?nav=87-frontpage-entryLeadStory

Posted by Warren Porter at March 23, 2013 10:51 AM
Comments
Comment #363233

Warren

Obama and the democrats got a tax increase when the top bracket was raised. They have no intention of making any real cuts, and their unwillingness to allow greater disgression to dept heads to manage the cuts to the annual budget increases ie ” the sequester ” to allow for cutting of actual waste in order to use them as a political bludgeon demonstrates this.

IMO the senate budget is a joke, and the 900+ billion in tax increases are DOA in the house as they should be. We could grow our way out of this defecit if the progressive would stop kissing the asses of the extreme enviormental groups, and big labor. We know that will never happen though, and so we will cotinue to suffer in the name of the marxist agenda.

Posted by: dbs at March 23, 2013 12:15 PM
Comment #363234
Obama and the democrats got a tax increase when the top bracket was raised.

And Boehner and his Republicans obtained a spending decrease during the 2011 negotiations regarding the debt ceiling. Now, the two sides are even and must begin negotiations anew. As far as I know, Obama and his allies do not wish to modify tax rates anymore; however, there is a desire to implement the reforms proposed by Romney/Ryan last year. I think it would be beneficial to close some loopholes and simplify the tax code, but I think this can be done without lowering rates if the additional revenue is used for deficit reduction and not for additional spending. I think the offers from Obama and his allies to reform entitlement spending through measures such as chained CPI and increasing ages of eligibility represent genuine desires to reduce spending, so I conclude your statement, “They have no intention of making any real cuts” is rooted in dogma and ideology and not from an honest assessment of current events.

IMO the senate budget is a joke
Of course it is, which is my thesis is that this whole procedure is a sham. I am confident that none of the 50 Democrats who voted for this thing actually care a whit about it.

The real negotiation powers are Obama and Boehner and the two of them had nothing to do with the Senate budget. I still cannot fathom why conservatives utilized the lack of Senate Budget resolutions as a rallying call when it has been long clear that the Senate is a paralyzed institution unable to lead as long as the Republicans continue their unprecedented filibustering.

Nonetheless, it is interesting to see how Patty Murray handles things in contrast to Kent Conrad. Conrad was a real wonk, but Murray is more politically attuned. This means Murray had an easier time passing her budget even though the actual details of the budget might be unhealthy for the nation.

We could grow our way out of this defecit if the progressive would stop kissing the asses of the extreme enviormental groups, and big labor. We know that will never happen though, and so we will cotinue to suffer in the name of the marxist agenda.
I am not in the mood to argue with hyperbole today. Posted by: Warren Porter at March 23, 2013 1:04 PM
Comment #363241

There will be no compromise and the US economy is done for. Within the next few months, the stock market will crash and all will be lost. We have no future. We are destined to become a 3rd world nation; which is what the socialist left wants.

Posted by: DSP2195 at March 23, 2013 1:32 PM
Comment #363243

I have a solution to all our problems.

Start paying all your taxes to your local government. I think you would be surprised how fast local government can solve problems when it has to.

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 23, 2013 1:58 PM
Comment #363248

Warren

The republicans offered to close loopholes as an option to bring in more tax money. Obama demanded rates be raised on those that already pay the lions share of income tax in this country. He got his wiay. Now he wants to squeeze even more out of this same group of tax payers.

The spending in congress is out of control, and unsustainable at its current levels. Gov’t is the problem, not the solution. The only way to truely solve the problem is to freeze spending at current levels, and grow the private economy until we reach balance. There are too many takers in this country with their hands out. Anyone capable of working should be doing so, regardless of the jobs they are forced to accept. No one should be forced to carry another because they feel certain jobs are beneath their dignity. That means work 2 jobs if need be.


“I am not in the mood to argue with hyperbole today”

It is not hyperbole, it is a statement of fact. If you choose to discount it, you do so at your own risk. Democrats bankrupted my former state of California, and are now doing the same to the entire country. Wake up and smell the coffee before it’s too late.

Posted by: dbs at March 23, 2013 3:11 PM
Comment #363251
The republicans offered to close loopholes as an option to bring in more tax money.
This was true when Romney/Ryan were running for President/Vice President, but now that Obama has been reelected, the GOP has taken this sensible idea of the table. It seems like they cannot tolerate the idea of accomplishing anything constructive as long as their guy isn’t in the White House.
Obama demanded rates be raised on those that already pay the lions share of income tax in this country. He got his wiay
And the Republicans demanded spending cuts during the last Congress and they got their way; does this mean we should stop cutting spending?
The spending in congress is out of control, and unsustainable at its current levels. Gov’t is the problem, not the solution. The only way to truely solve the problem is to freeze spending at current levels, and grow the private economy until we reach balance.
Enough with the slogans recycled from a speech from 30 years ago; I am smart enough to know that you believe there are circumstances where government is the solution and is not a problem. It is true that entitlement spending poses a long-term fiscal problem; however, the trends in non-defense discretionary spending are quite modest and don’t require much modification. The solution must come from a combination of benefit decreases, taxation increases and other legislation to decrease the cost of health care (ie Obamacare).
There are too many takers in this country with their hands out. Anyone capable of working should be doing so, regardless of the jobs they are forced to accept. No one should be forced to carry another because they feel certain jobs are beneath their dignity. That means work 2 jobs if need be.
Is this because of the poor economy or has the work ethic of this country actually changed in profound ways? Do people nowadays aspire to live off of handouts? Or do they try their best to find the right job for them? There might be a small number of able-bodied people who spend too much time on the dole, but I remain unconvinced that they dwarf the number of recipients who are disabled, elderly or minors. If you could provide evidence to the contrary, I would appreciate it. However, I need hard statistics, not some silly anecdote. If what you said were true, it would imply that we are facing a labor shortage, but I do not see any evidence that points to that being the case.
It is not hyperbole, it is a statement of fact.
I’m sorry, but when you throw around defunct slogans from three decades ago and accuse the American Left of following a “marxist agenda”, then I must conclude that I am dealing with hyperbole. The fact is that our spending problems come from demographics, not “big” labor or extreme environmentalists.
Democrats bankrupted my former state of California
California remains the land of Reagan and most of its problems can be traced to the continuing influence of his style of conservatism. Republican minorities in CA are empowered to prevent the Democrats from crafting viable solutions. I guess you are correct to point out that California foreshadows the problems that the rest of the nation faces as the Republicans attempt to obstruct any sensible solution to our problems. Posted by: Warren Porter at March 23, 2013 4:13 PM
Comment #363255

See: USDebtClock.org

Comment #363241 There will be no compromise and the US economy is done for. Within the next few months, the stock market will crash and all will be lost. We have no future. We are destined to become a 3rd world nation; which is what the socialist left wants. Posted by: DSP2195 at March 23, 2013 1:32 PM
That ain’t far from the truth.
  • Total U.S. Federal Debt: $16.7 Trillion (more than U.S. GDP of $15.7 Trillion), and growing by over $1.2 Trillion per year.
  • The U.S. population has 4.5% of the global population of 7.074 billion, but the total U.S. Federal debt of $16.7 Trillion is 33% of all global government debt of $50.2 Trillion;
  • Total U.S. nation-wide debt: $59.2 Trillion ($187,771 per person);
  • Total U.S. nation-wide debt of $59.2 Trillion is more than all global government debt of $50.2 Trillion;
  • Total U.S. unfunded liabilities ($123 Trillion) exceed current total nation-wide assets ($93 Trillion) by $33 Trillion;
  • Total U.S> personal debt ($15.9 Trillion) exceeds GDP ($15.7 Trillion);
  • Total global debt is over $109 Trillion (which doubled in the last 10 years), and the U.S., with only 4.5% of the world population, has 54% of the total global debt;
  • Total global debt of $109 Trillion is $15,408 per person (based on world population of 7.074 Billion, which is growing by 210,000 more people per day; In year 2006, there was 1.15 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 7.68 billion acres / 6.68 billion people); by 2039, there may be only 0.59 acres of arable land per person, world-wide (i.e. 7.68 billion acres / 13 billion people));
  • As of JULY-2011, the federal National Debt per-person was $46,474, which is about 8.4 times more than the it was near the end of the Great Depression (which was $5,674 in year 1941 in 2011 inflation adjusted U.S. dollars).
The world is suffocating from debt, but too few seem to be worried about it.

What is the interest on all that debt, which begs the question:

  • Where will the money come from to merely pay the interest on so much debt, when that money does not yet exist?

At any rate, the majority of voters have the government that they elect, and re-elect, … , and re-elect, at least, possibly, until repeatedly rewarding failure, and repeatedly rewarding FOR-SALE, incompetent, arrogant, greedy, and corrupt incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election rates finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at March 23, 2013 6:31 PM
Comment #363258

Warren

“California remains the land of Reagan and most of its problems can be traced to the continuing influence of his style of conservatism. Republican minorities in CA are empowered to prevent the Democrats from crafting viable solutions.”

Republicans in California have almost no power. If Democrats cannot control California, they have no right to govern at all. Short of a one-party state neither Democrats nor Republicans will ever enjoy the kind of power Democrats have in California.

Don’t start talking like Stephen.

Posted by: C&J at March 23, 2013 6:56 PM
Comment #363259

Democrats bankrupted my former state of California, and are now doing the same to the entire country. Wake up and smell the coffee before it’s too late.
Posted by: dbs at March 23, 2013 3:11 PM

Not only California dbs, but a number of other democrat states and cities.

Warren writes; “California remains the land of Reagan and most of its problems can be traced to the continuing influence of his style of conservatism. Republican minorities in CA are empowered to prevent the Democrats from crafting viable solutions.”

It is beyond the comprehension of anyone who knows anything about CA to believe this crap.

Posted by: Royal Flush at March 23, 2013 6:58 PM
Comment #363260

My liberal friends should really organize another party and get rid of the democrat label and the few remaining in the party who are even a little bit moderate. The “People’s Welfare Party” would be a good name for them to adopt. I believe they already have a majority who will vote for more welfare and winning elections would be simple.

Posted by: Royal Flush at March 23, 2013 7:09 PM
Comment #363261

I love this comment:

“I have a solution to all our problems.

Start paying all your taxes to your local government. I think you would be surprised how fast local government can solve problems when it has to.”

Posted by: Weary Willie at March 23, 2013 1:58 PM

The problem is:

“36 Obama aides owe $833,000 in back taxes”

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/politics-andrew-malcolm/012612-599002-obama-white-house-staff-back-taxes.htm#ixzz2OPd0cdx8
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

“Federal employees owe $3 billion in taxes”

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2009/12/federal_employees_owe_3_billio.html

“41 Obama White House aides owe the IRS $831,000 in back taxes — and they’re not alone”

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/09/congress-taxes-irs.html

“Shared Sacrifice: Dozens of White House Aides Owe Back Taxes”

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/01/26/shared_sacrifice_dozens_of_white_house_aides_owe_back_taxes

Posted by: DSP2195 at March 23, 2013 8:33 PM
Comment #363298

DSP2195-
Which figures out to 20,000 apiece, on average. So, then the next question: are we dealing with the danger of averages, where a few people with high levels of debt to the IRS increase the average amount?

The Next question is, out of how many? There are more than 41 or 36 employees in the White House; your own source cites a number of 457. Per employee, that’s below two thousand dollars. Your source also says that the White House staff pulls down about 37 million. Let’s do the math: 830,000/37 million= 2.24% of total payroll costs.

Most of that concentrated into about 7.9% of the staff. Or, put another way, 92.1% of the Obama staff owes no back taxes.

Your source makes a big deal out of the fact that a third of those people make over a hundred thousands dollars a year. This is the office of the leader of the free world, the President of the United States we’re talking about, and you’re thinking it’s odd that a third of that staff makes six figure salaries? Would you be so inclined to question those six figure salaries if we were talking about, say, the head office of Exxon Mobil, GE, or Halliburton?

And lets put some of those numbers in perspective. For one thing, you did notice that Andrew Malcolm pops up twice, making the same argument last year as he did in 2010, right? And did you happen to catch this part?

Federal workers owed more than $3 billion in income taxes in 2008, according to the Internal Revenue Service, a figure down slightly from the year before.

The agency reported that 276,300 current and retired federal employees owed $3,042,200,000 in 2008, down from $3,586,784,725 in unpaid taxes in 2007. The list includes White House and Congressional staffers and current and former active-duty and reserve members of the military.

2008 and 2007. Anything familiar about these years? I’d think you’d want to keep your targets, straight, no?

As for the incidence of owing back taxes?

Officials are quick to point out that federal employees are actually more compliant in paying taxes than the U.S. population as a whole. According to the IRS, 8.2 percent of the population was delinquent on their federal taxes at the end of 2011. That’s up from 7.8 percent the year before.

The delinquency rate at the Executive Office of the President was 2.1 percent. The rates for employees of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate were 3.7 percent and 3.3 percent, respectively. Overall, the 9.8 million workers included in the data had a delinquency rate of 3.2 percent.

In other worlds, even in the numbers you provide, the White House Staff comes out above average in terms of its rate of owed taxes.

The last question I’d like to ask is this: are we talking about people deliberately skipping out on what they owe, or are we talking about folks whose accountants slipped up, folks who didn’t prepare their forms right, or folks who simply got in over their head with work and forgot to file an extension? All these categories would fit the definition of owing taxes.

But of course, you’re basically surfing a wash of propaganda deliberately designed to produce certain feelings, rather than truly inform people or put things in perspective. That’s why little things like dates (which demonstrate it’s not Obama’s problem alone) proportions, and all these other things trip your arguments up: nobody set this argument up so that people couldn’t poke holes in it. No, they pushed this stuff wanting to get people like you angry and outraged. And there is a whole cottage industry worth of these provocateurs at work, continually feeding people this greasy hash.

And you know what? When people start saying, “I have the solution to all our problems,” I start walking for the door. We’re all just mortals here. But some people have gotten the strange idea that liberals are this strange species of self-destructive, uniquely flawed human beings, and that Obama is practically, if not actually, the Anti-Christ.

I hear people preaching doom, but when it comes to actually diagnosing what’s going on, they’re being lead around by the nose by folks whose fact-checking at best leaves something to be desired.

I think our system would have been in much better shape if it hadn’t been run by those who have these big fake crises to either create or head off.

America needs stability in its leadership that one particular party is utterly incapable of providing. Even if the other party is imperfect, it is at least not filled with people so badly misinformed, so out of touch, that they’d actually risk our nation’s financial solvency to teach us all a lesson about the need for fiscal balance.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 25, 2013 1:47 PM
Comment #363306

Stephen, Why do you blow off Obama’s people owing back taxes? Seems to me you would be appalled that some of YOUR PEOPLE are breaking the law and getting away with it. But I guess that goes with Your Republicans bad, Democrats good annology.

Posted by: KAP at March 25, 2013 4:09 PM
Comment #363308
France’s repressive tax regime has sent entrepreneurs fleeing abroad and lost the country up to a million jobs, a damning new report has revealed.

Tax hikes and employment regulations imposed by left and right wing governments over 20 years meant there were now 60,000 French businessmen abroad employing around 16 people each.

The figures were released amid a flood of wealthy French quitting France this year to avoid a looming socialist tax of 75 per cent on all earnings over one million euros - about £850,000.

Film star Gerard Depardieu, the Mulliez family who own the Auchan supermarket chain, electronic music icon Jean-Michel Jarre and France’s richest man Bernard Arnault have all quit France in the past six months.

Now research by the think-tank Concorde has found that three percent of the two million French living abroad now own companies and if they had not left there would one million more people in work in France.

Posted by: Rhinehold at March 25, 2013 4:34 PM
Comment #363312

KAP-
No, no, no. Why do you think it’s important! Is the overall White House staff more likely to owe back taxes than the general public? No. Is it a huge percentage of the total money taxpayers pay these guys? No.

Does owing back taxes reflect deliberate tax evasion, by necessity? Not at all. Do you have to have broken the tax laws to owe money? No.

As for getting away with it, if they were getting away with it, they wouldn’t be showing up in the source, which is from the IRS. If the IRS knows about it, they haven’t gotten away with it.

Does the information identify individuals? No. Does it indicate whether the back taxes were accrued by purposeful evasion? Not at all. Does it indicate that taxes remain unpaid by these people year after year? No. Does it indicate the statistical spread of the level of the back taxes? No. So you might have a few people who owe hundreds of thousands, and most just owing a few hundred or thousand.

In short, there is not enough in the data, the hard facts to make the kind of sloppy, unproven assumptions you’re making.

So I don’t need to be appalled. The rate of owing back taxes is at worst no higher than that of the population at large, there’s no evidence, on account of privacy restrictions, about who owes how much and why, and therefore no logically valid cause to believe that the law is being flouted in a general sense, and that people are owing money for illegitimate reasons.

You just need another reason to be outraged at me for suggesting that conservatives are too dependent on weakly founded propaganda.

Rhinehold-
Okay. First, we have a progressive income tax, where they have a Value Added Tax, which has specific consequences for business owners. Second, our rates on sales, income and other taxes aren’t comparable at this point, even if Obama’s policies pass in general, to what folks on the European continent pay.

So, as I asked the others, what’s your point? That we shouldn’t enact a Value Added Tax or tax wealth at a confiscatory rate? pthtbbt. No problem. That wasn’t on our agenda anyways!

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 25, 2013 6:09 PM
Comment #363315

Stephen, Would you be saying the same if it were a republican W.H.?

Posted by: KAP at March 25, 2013 7:40 PM
Comment #363316

By the way Stephen W.H. aides and staffers should be held to a higher standard, they are working for the President and if they screw up it reflects on the President.

Posted by: KAP at March 25, 2013 7:53 PM
Comment #363327

KAP-
I was able to find much more important things to hold the Bush Administration accountable on, and if I were cynical enough to ding them on this, like DSP was, I’d probably hit them on something else. Republicans lionize people for avoiding taxes, so it wouldn’t have an equal effect on them. They could probably complain about the complexity of the tax code and everything. The point of this argument is to hurt a policy push for raising taxes on the rich.

The whole point of the argument, if you read what they write, is to accuse the staff members of the Obama Administration of deliberate tax evasion. But owing back taxes and deliberately ducking out on your taxes are two different things. There’s no way I could prove on the substance, which I prefer to innuendo, that members of the Bush Administration didn’t simply make a mistake in what deduction they took, or empty out a retirement account too early. I couldn’t even put names to numbers to really identify any problem staff members, any real deadbeats.

The argument, in short, only has propaganda value, and I’m interested in being better than that.

It’s also an argument that, if you look at the numbers, quickly becomes rather silly, which is another reason I wouldn’t attack Republicans with it. I don’t like to set myself up for somebody like me to come along and knock me down to size with the kinds of facts I quote. We can reason that the White House should be better than this, but with something about two percent back taxes among those who serve the President, and a number that seems about par for the course for the population elsewhere in the White House, it just seems like argument for effect, not to really hit at a damning shortfall.

The Conservative Media has become a den of gossips, of folks who find fault with others to kill their popularity, rather than do things that raise their profile instead.

This is just another fake scandal.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 26, 2013 12:54 PM
Comment #363328

Stephen, If we let those who work for government get away with even minor infractions such as owing back taxes, what else do we allow them to do? I personnely don’t care what party is in power, wrong is wrong.

Posted by: KAP at March 26, 2013 1:22 PM
Comment #363344

KAP-
It’s fluff, not stuff. You can insist on more strained outrage on its account if you want to, but it’s not even something I would have followed as a critic of the Bush Administration. Owing taxes is not necessarily a crime.

You can’t even determine, based on the evidence, who did and did not do something wrong to incur that obligation.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t stop you from implying what you believe to be true, and that’s the problem. This is just some space for a person like you to insert your general outrage about tax policy, your sense that it’s just all corrupt elitism anyways.

I don’t have any use for that Bull****. I want stuff I can nail people on. This is just bread and circuses for the Right Wing crowd.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 26, 2013 6:27 PM
Comment #363348

Stephen I’ve been reading your BULLS**T posts for over 6 years now and have seen you rant and rave over trivial BULLS**T from the Bush administration yet you let slide the things Democrats do. You are nothing but a partisian talking point pusher and the only thing you can do is push the Democrats good, Republicans bad line. The only thing I can tell you is GROW UP and smell the BS you are pushing.

Posted by: KAP at March 26, 2013 7:07 PM
Comment #363357

KAP-
Charming.

Let me explain to you my philosophy on this, as it might help you to understand.

At the end of the day, I’m not just interested in the rhetoric. Words are treacherous, and if you let it happen, you can end up being turned in circles by them.

And that might suit certain leaders, undeserving of their positions, but it does you no good.

No, what we need is effective information. First, and most important, we need it so we can act and propose things in good judgment. Second, if we are to argue something, our aim shouldn’t be to try and browbeat people into taking our position. As a matter of fact, that’s pretty useless. It’s a choice.

I don’t see the data to compel me to take your position. I see a lot of outrage over a situation that we know absolutely nothing in enough detail to assess guilt, intent, or much of anything else useful.

The line of “Oh Stephen says good things about Democrats and bad things about Republicans” is a load of bull, by the way. It’s a classic ad hominem argument that has little to do with the truth value of the claim itself. Yes, I tend to say more good things about DEMs, and more bad things about Republicans. And, if you’ll not, folks on the right do it, too.

And you won’t find me complaining. Why? Well, it’s a simple matter of the fact that folks on the Red column lean a certain direction, and I lean another. That’s pretty much what it reads on the can, ladies and gentlemen.

So why don’t you quite complaining about me arguing what is natural for me to argue, and deal with my facts and figures for what they are? I don’t feel like being neutral, I don’t think its justified.

Stop dancing around it. Start dealing with things on a rational basis. You’re not going to get me to change.

Quite trying to win by trashing me. Start looking at the facts, the way I did in order to deal with the argument about fiscal matters.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at March 26, 2013 10:47 PM
Comment #363358

That’s likewise Stephen, my facts are different then yours. I’m not Dem. nor Rep. I am a conservative. I see things through a conservative eye, you see things through a liberal eye. I weigh your facts and think your full of s**t and likewise you think conservatives are full of it. Your not going to get me to change and I won’t get you to change.

Posted by: KAP at March 26, 2013 11:30 PM
Comment #363636

I’m interested in nailing things down, KAP, to a more objective level so there’s a good way to decide between one approach and the other. If our politics comes down to “There’s no accounting for taste”, I’m not interested. I want policies to work, to do objective good, and measuring it by moronic political measures does not interest me.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at April 2, 2013 2:10 PM
Comment #378746

Great blog and I love what you have to say and I think I will tweet this out to my friends so they can check it out as well. I like what you have to say Pollen and Bleu | Pollen & Bleu | Rivertrees Residences | Rivertrees | coco palms pasir ris | coco palms | coco palms condo | the rise @ oxley | the rise @ oxley residences | rise @ oxley | handbags | handbags Singapore | ladies bags excellent article.

Posted by: the rise @ oxley residences at May 25, 2014 12:26 AM
Post a comment