Crash the train to stop it

[donquixote99]

If we want to not 'kick the can down the road,' it can be done by increasing taxation to something over about 30.5% of GDP. More than a few OECD countries collect tax at this level.

[finnbow]

Republicans say they want to balance the budget — but meanwhile they have ruled out every mathematical path for doing so (cuts to defense, cuts to entitlements, wiping out non-defense discretionary spending, or raising taxes).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ostage-budget/

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

It isn't namecalling when it's true, liar.

You can try to wave away your lies but the fact stands. You lie with little compunction, Mike Whell.

Let's see: I invited you to respond in a substantive manner, and you respond by continuing your name-calling. Wonderful behavior for a forum admin, I must say...

I thought I might get a substantive response from you in my post above. Instead, I got a reply that I'd expect from a grade-school kid, but one that really isn't worthy of an adult.

If I posted a "lie" in my prior post, then you're more than welcome to refute the information in that post. If you're not able to, or not willing to, then you might look in the mirror to find the person who's being disingenuous in this thread.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Republicans say they want to balance the budget — but meanwhile they have ruled out every mathematical path for doing so (cuts to defense, cuts to entitlements, wiping out non-defense discretionary spending, or raising taxes).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ostage-budget/

We'll see if the Repubs are serious about it...this time. Those who might be inclined to vote for them are fed up with platitudes and promises.

Let me ask you a serious question:

The Repubs control a single branch of government. There's no chance that they achieve anything close to a balanced budget without support from the Senate and the President. Are there any Dems in the Senate that might be agreeable to fiscal discipline?

I think WaPo, as usual, is being less than honest in the editorial you posted. It doesn't even have to be that hard. If the parties could simply agree to freeze spending at current levels, and spend no more than budgeted, we could start the process of returning to fiscal sanity. We didn't break this overnight, and it'll take some time to fix.

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

If we want to not 'kick the can down the road,' it can be done by increasing taxation to something over about 30.5% of GDP. More than a few OECD countries collect tax at this level.

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem, IMHO. Hell, if we just found a way to cut in half federal funds lost due to waste and graft we could start to pay down the debt.

Political realities in Washington being what they are, where no one trusts anyone anymore, I don't think we're going to get agreement on what to reduce to achieve a balanced budget, or where or how to increase revenue, getting cooperation will be the first challenge.

If possible, maybe an agreement could be reached with a temporary tax increase coupled with a commitment to a balanced budget. None of this "balance the budget over 5 years" or "over seven years" crap, but something that demonstrates real political will on both sides.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem, IMHO. Hell, if we just found a way to cut in half federal funds lost due to waste and graft we could start to pay down the debt.

Political realities in Washington being what they are, where no one trusts anyone anymore, I don't think we're going to get agreement on what to reduce to achieve a balanced budget, or where or how to increase revenue, getting cooperation will be the first challenge.

If possible, maybe an agreement could be reached with a temporary tax increase coupled with a commitment to a balanced budget. None of this "balance the budget over 5 years" or "over seven years" crap, but something that demonstrates real political will on both sides.

The primary problem is that Democrats and a large part of the public see your (and the GOP) argument as being made in bad faith that cannot and should not be rewarded with good faith negotiations. Your party has no genuine interest in deficit/debt reduction, but want it as an issue for curtailing social programs advanced by the Democratic Party and broadly supported by the American people.

The GOP took no action during the Trump presidency other than making the deficit worse with their tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. Similarly, Dubya trashed Clinton's success on the deficit with his tax cuts. The only fiscal action that Republicans universally support are tax cuts and these tax cuts have themselves been significant drivers in increasing the debt/deficit, yet they demand that Democrats and lower and middle class Americans pay for them. IOW, the Republicans are not a party serious about governance.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by whell

If the parties could simply agree to freeze spending at current levels, and spend no more than budgeted, we could start the process of returning to fiscal sanity. We didn't break this overnight, and it'll take some time to fix.

That could be a real start!

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

The Repubs control a single branch of government. There's no chance that they achieve anything close to a balanced budget without support from the Senate and the President.

Even when the GOP controls all branches of government, it does nothing to balance the budget. Indeed, they deliberately make it worse as any serious evaluation of economic performance over the past 40 years clearly demonstrates. Then they demand that the Democrats rescue the economy from their own malfeasance (which the Democrats have mostly done). It seems the Democrats may be willing to call their bluff this time around.

[donquixote99]

My guess is there is no bluff and no way to negotiate with the Freedom Caucus. They are bent on forcing the Treasury into default unless they get absolute surrender. Only way out is to highlight the craziness enough to peel off enough Republicans to vote with the Democrats.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The primary problem is that Democrats and a large part of the public see your (and the GOP) argument as being made in bad faith that cannot and should not be rewarded with good faith negotiations. Your party has no genuine interest in deficit/debt reduction, but want it as an issue for curtailing social programs advanced by the Democratic Party and broadly supported by the American people.

The GOP took no action during the Trump presidency other than making the deficit worse with their tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. Similarly, Dubya trashed Clinton's success on the deficit with his tax cuts. The only fiscal action that Republicans universally support are tax cuts and these tax cuts have themselves been significant drivers in increasing the debt/deficit, yet they demand that Democrats and lower and middle-class Americans pay for them. IOW, the Republicans are not a party serious about governance.

First, I'm not a registered Republican, so they're not "my party".

Second, you bitch about Republicans, with some justification. But NEITHER party has shown any inclination toward fiscal responsibility. You can go from Bush II, to Obama, to Trump and then to Biden, and fiscal discipline is nowhere to be found.

I asked you earlier, and I'll ask again: are there any Dems in the Senate, or the House for that matter, that would support - when it matters, with votes - for a logical plan for balancing the budget for the long haul?