Boehner's Life Lesson To All

House Speaker, John Boehner, has notified the House he will not be permitting another increase in the debt ceiling until more spending cuts are made. You can call Boehner whatever you want, stubborn, foolish, manipulative, and anything else he has heard before because it doesn’t matter. He’s right. And let this be a lesson to all Americans across the nation.

How on Earth does it make sense to anyone to increase your debt, keep spending, without making any spending cuts anywhere else? This whole that we've dug ourselves into is just getting deeper, and deeper. On a much larger scale, the debt limit is much like our credit limits and credit scores. Boehner says, "Yes, allowing America to default would be irresponsible," adding, "But it would be more irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling without taking dramatic steps to reduce spending and reform the budget."

Think about how if you raise your credit limit, keep spending money, and then you can barely pay the minimum payment. It will ruin your whole life trying to operate that way. It's common sense that spending needs to be considered and modified before any debt ceiling is increased. However, when politics are involved, the debt ceiling becomes a three-ring circus.

This is about numbers and figures, just like checks and balances. However, the partisan hatred fuels the struggle to agree on anything. This isn't a subjective matter where political opinions should be coming into play. House Democrat, Steve Hoyer said it best, "The debt limit should not be a political issue ... we've incurred the debts. We need to pay the debts." It's a matter of fact, such as 1+1=2. It's not a matter of opinion and it's not optional. Although this will likely cause a stir, however it needs to be done to prevent America from sinking into a much deeper, darker place.

Posted by bigtex at June 11, 2012 8:10 PM
Comment #346258

I agree!

Step 1: Eliminate ALL energy, agriculture, commerce subsidies.
Step 2: Cut military weapons expenses and purchases by 1/2, withdraw all troops from foreign soil within three years, and reduce military pay by topping out maximum salaries to that of 3X the average noncommissioned personnel pay. Someone explained in a thread on education, rely on dedicated, patriotic people.. They will work for less.
Step 3: Cut out federal tax deductions for entertainment and meals. Corporations and businesses who find it necessary to use these to do business can take it out of their employees’ pockets, not the American public’s pockets!
Step 4: Cut out home mortgage deductions on federal taxes. Go ‘free market’.
Step 5: Cut ALL federal spending on infrastructure. Let the people of Nebraska, Nevada, Arizona, etc. pay for their own roads, bridges, airports,etc. Again, free market system. Let people buy local goods and foods.
Step 6: Deregulate all industries - finance, communication, insurance, medicine, etc. Quit strangling business and quit protecting monopolies. Let states regulate these industries and protect their citizens from monopolies and fraud. No federal support and no federal interference from state regulation.

I could go on and on. Bottom line is that if you want to cut, cut all. I know you were thinking of cutting SS and Medicare. Do it, but cut the equivalents for businesses, too.

Posted by: LibRick at June 5, 2012 9:00 PM
Comment #346280


Eliminate energy subsidies - yes. Probably need to phase out but yes. You would need to be prepared for a rise in the price of fuel, however.

Withdrawing military - probably would set off a war, which would cost a lot more. As for pay, with 10 years in service an E7 (the median e grade) makes $3085; an O8 makes $9458. By your measure, you would save $203 a month if you cut the pay to 3x. If you were talking about generals in general, you could actually raise the salaries of some at the lower levels. But speaking at the average, there are currently about 40 generals on active duty, you would would be saving the taxpayer $8120 a month. Try balancing the budget with that.

Entertainment and meals - depends. Some legitimate business is done here. Sometimes it can mean making more money and therefore paying more in taxes. There is also a moral difference between letting people and firms keep their money and the state giving money.

Mortgage interest - cut it if you want. Again, however, letting people keep some of their own money is morally different than paying them with the money of others.

Re infrastructure - this is (or can be) a legitimate investment in that it creates more wealth than it consumes. One reason poor people stay poor is that they cannot recognize the difference between spending on investment and spending on consumption.

Let the states do more - a generally good idea. Goes against all the ideas of liberalism since the 1960s, however.

Re SS, Medicare etc. - these are expenditures from other taxpayers. They also are where there is actually a lot of money to be had. If you cut the all pay of all the generals in the Army, it would yield you $378,320 a month. That just is not much money in the big picture.

BTW - on the education thread, we conservatives generally agreed that SOME teachers should be paid more and some less. The good ones would earn more. Others would earn less and some would leave the profession making room for better ones.

Posted by: C&J at June 5, 2012 9:36 PM
Comment #346281

What a ridiculous article. Bigtex, you have no idea what you are talking about. None. I see no reason to be polite about such aggressively promoting such harmful action through sheer ignorance and partisanship.

First of all, Boehner made this statement about three weeks ago. He will wait until after the election to see who wins. The decision to raise needs to be made by next January, which is when the automatic trigger was put in place.

For those conservatives with the long-term memory of a mayfly, the agreement after the last debt ceiling negotiation instituted a bipartisan commission to agree upon how to address deficits and debt; having failed to agree, an automatic trigger was put in place, requiring large cuts including military cuts.

The GOP is reneging.

Second, a person would have to be drop dead stupid- gullible almost beyond belief- to believe the debt term ceiling is a good way to approach the issue of debt and deficits. The debt term ceiling authorizes payment of spending that has already occurred- NOT additional spending. Failure to make that payment results in default. It means reneging on the full faith and credit of the United States currency. This would almost certainly result in a worldwide economic depression.

When faced with this basic fact last summer and fall, conservatives started backtracking. ‘Default,’ they said, laughing nervously while staring at their feet. ‘Just kidding. We meant instantaneously cut 44% of government spending. That’s all.’ Now, that’s just as stupid as defaulting on debt. Government spending consists of about 20% of the GDP. Cutting 44% would immediately result in a 9% reduction of GDP, once again instantly plunging the US economy into economic depression.

Fourth, Romney did not support (or oppose) the debt ceiling fight made by Republicans last time around, and he will not this time either. Unlike most conservatives, he’s not that stupid. And I’m sorry to keep using the word ‘stupid,’ but there’s simply no other way to see this. If Romney wins and the GOP keeps the House, the issue will disappear. If Obama wins but the GOP keeps the House, then game on. It would border on treason for conservatives to intentionally cause another Great Depression, so I don’t think that will happen. We’ll see.

Fifth, if anyone in Congress thinks revenues and spending need adjusting, then Congress should simply legislate revenues and spending as a normal part of the budget process. Using the debt ceiling to take the country hostage harms the credit rating and hurts the country as a whole, merely in order to benefit the fortunes of one disloyal political party. And make no mistake. Go this route with the debt ceiling, and that is fundamentally disloyal to the United States of America. Don’t do it.

Finally, there is a way to approach debt and deficits which makes fiscal sense and has a record of working. Look at where the economy stood at the beginning of the Clinton administration. Faced with debts and deficits from the Reagan/Bush administrations, the Democrats increased tax rates with the 1993-94 Omnibus bill. By the end of the Clinton administration, there were budget surpluses, and a ten year projection of a $10 trillion surplus. Due to the more recent miserable failure of the Bush administration- asset deflation, stock market crash, credit crunch, huge deficits with wars charged on the national credit card, and a doubling of the debt- coming out of this downturn has been challenging, to say the least. Nevertheless, the game plan is there. Look to Japan and Great Britain- not Greece, but Japan and Great Britain- to see what happens when debts and deficits are addressed with spending cuts.

It’s just shameful that conservatives would even consider destroying the economy. Shameful. I know not all conservatives would do that, but the Know Nothings of the Tea Party are a danger to the economic well-being of all of us.

Posted by: phx8 at June 5, 2012 9:44 PM
Comment #346297

See how this sentence strikes you:

“Hey, honey, I just got demoted at work, took a huge pay cut. Time to pay our debts!”

Odd, isn’t it? Most people would tend to their basic needs first. Thankfully, we don’t have to make that choice, we can tend our needs and our debt at the same time.

It’s naive to think we can put the emphasis on repaying debts now, at this time, when we can’t even maintain full employment. Revenues are what pay off debts best. Economic activity is what gets you those revenues. Cutting economic activity by cutting spending in the midst of an economic downturn like this is just asking for a double dip.

We need to get our priorities in a less counterproductive order. You don’t try to pay back money, before you have money to pay back with. You don’t sacrifice basic needs in an econmy like this for debt repayment unless you absolutely have to.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at June 6, 2012 12:26 AM
Comment #354242

lilingling@wind1009 Within louis vuitton store add-on in order to making sure Louis Vuitton Sunglasses that the Coach Outlet handbag is actually durable Louis Vuitton Outlet Online as well as well-made, a person Coach Outlet Store additionally would like the fashionable Louis Vuitton Bags item which will Coach Outlet Online Store change mind because Coach Outlet Store Online a person mind lower Coach Outlet Online the hectic town Louis Vuitton Outlet road. lilingling@wind1009.

Posted by: Louis Vuitton at October 9, 2012 5:22 AM
Comment #358086 has been in business for more than 10 years, we are a professional US wedding dress and uk wedding dresses manufacturer, and our goal is to provide complete one-stop shopping for all brides, bridesmaids and all special occasion events. We strive to provide you with the most current selection in Mldress, the most complete size range, the best prices and the largest variety of styles. Each style was built around the concept of offering a complete dressok, suitable product assortment for your social moment. Each style includes the product and information necessary to help you create a memorable wedding ceremony or can buy cheap handbags in our store

Posted by: dresss at December 4, 2012 4:11 AM
Post a comment