Congress' Select Committee - Will they git 'er done?

[ATM]

There is just not enough of [STRIKE]them[/STRIKE] us willing to put their jobs on the line at this time...

Us is the problem, us as a nation, we the people.

If the means for us to hold them accountable in representing us were truly gone, we would no longer be self governed - we would be ruled.

The American people as a whole are currently fine with this.
If you are not fine with being ruled, wake up your fellow Americans.

 

[jedi]

To All,

Just a few quick thoughts.

I think this committee has a reasonable chance of succeeding because neither the demopubicans or republicrats want to face the sequestration that will occur IF they do nothing. By putting in provisions for automatic cuts to programs each side loves it will force them to work harder to see that the perceived damage is limited.

HornadyInl,

I think the cuts are feasible ONLY because of the sequestration that is in there.

As I understand it IF the Super Committee cannot propose legislation that both the House and Senate can pass to THEN automatic, uncontrolled cuts will become automatic.

So, big uncontrolled cuts to the military that will make many old line Republicans scream and gnash their teeth.

So, big uncontrolled cuts to medicare and medicaid that will make many liberal Democrats scream and gnash their teeth.

It will only be fear of these automatic cuts that will drive them toward a reluctant compromise.

Just my .

Regards,

Doug

"Will they git 'er done?"

No.

You aRE LISTENING TO WHAT Fox News says their position is. I don't know how many times they have to state their position before you will believe them.

Did you see/read the replies in red above. Congress has hung their own noose. If the Super 12 can not present proposals for Congress to vote YES/NO on (Congress can NOT debate those proposals) then in the debt ceiling bill they just pass there are automatic cuts that occur starting in Fall 2011 (I think NOV). The cuts are for all programs except Social Security (the biggest debt) I think. So defense, medicaid, federal workers, etc.. all have automatic cuts if Congress can not make up it's mind.

This is going to put enormous preassure on the group and congress as a whole. Either the do something or they will all suffer via the cuts.

 

[other guy]

Did you see/read the replies in red above. Congress has hung their own noose. If the Super 12 can not present proposals for Congress to vote YES/NO on (Congress can NOT debate those proposals) then in the debt ceiling bill they just pass there are automatic cuts that occur starting in Fall 2011 (I think NOV). The cuts are for all programs except Social Security (the biggest debt) I think. So defense, medicaid, federal workers, etc.. all have automatic cuts if Congress can not make up it's mind.

This is going to put enormous preassure on the group and congress as a whole. Either the do something or they will all suffer via the cuts.

Yes, The same pressure that was on them in the debt ceiling debackle. The Republicans did not buckle one bit. They held firm, no new revenue. They will do the same thing this time. The dems will cave again. Do you see a pattern here.

 

[ATM]

Yes, The same pressure that was on them in the debt ceiling debackle. The Republicans did not buckle one bit. They held firm, no new revenue. They will do the same thing this time. The dems will cave again. Do you see a pattern here.

Yes. The pattern I see is that for as long as these 2 parties have been taking turns holding firm and caving to each other, our nation has remained on a course for disaster.

They rock the boat back and forth with every election cycle but never change the heading.

Time to change course or sink.

 

[jedi]

Yes, The same pressure that was on them in the debt ceiling debackle. The Republicans did not buckle one bit. They held firm, no new revenue. They will do the same thing this time. The dems will cave again. Do you see a pattern here.

& the problem with this is?
I did not care for either bill that the Ds or Rs put on the table. Nor do I like the bill that was passed.

Look at this Jeremy M. Day · Let’s Put The Recent Spending Bill Into Perspective… to see what a mess (finacially) we really are in. The reality is the Ds and Rs are fighting about cutting 1 happy meal and day from the budget when the mortage house payment is killing us!

The "cuts" in the new lawed are over 10 years. What a laugh! The next Congress does NOT have to listen to that new law and can just pass another one on to of it. So in essence does cuts do not really exist.

It's like saying OK we agree that we will no longer buy a happy meal for the rest of the year. However come next month a new group of household members will be calling the shots and they should also agree to not buy happy meals for the rest of the year. That "new" group can tell us to go pound sand and do whatever they want.

 

[other guy]

& the problem with this is?
I did not care for either bill that the Ds or Rs put on the table. Nor do I like the bill that was passed.

Look at this Jeremy M. Day · Let’s Put The Recent Spending Bill Into Perspective… to see what a mess (finacially) we really are in. The reality is the Ds and Rs are fighting about cutting 1 happy meal and day from the budget when the mortage house payment is killing us!

The "cuts" in the new lawed are over 10 years. What a laugh! The next Congress does NOT have to listen to that new law and can just pass another one on to of it. So in essence does cuts do not really exist.

It's like saying OK we agree that we will no longer buy a happy meal for the rest of the year. However come next month a new group of household members will be calling the shots and they should also agree to not buy happy meals for the rest of the year. That "new" group can tell us to go pound sand and do whatever they want.

We all know the numbers. the argument is how to get them under control. In your example the deficit is appx. $17,000 a yr. The republican solution is to cut spending. The democrat solution is to cut spending and increase revenue by closing some tax loopholes. I say the dem way makes more sense. BUT, neither way is going to solve the problem. The problem is all the empty factories in my town and I'm sure your town has a bunch of them too. All of our good factory jobs have been shipped overseas by the job creaters so they could get cheap labor. So i don't know what the solution is. It is not going to get better any time soon. So we are going to have to decide how to spend our dwindling revenue. We can spend it by being the world cop or we can spend it here at home taking care of our own people. That is the choice we are going to have to make.We are going downhill very fast. Who would have thought we would be seeing London on fire just a year ago. What will be burning next year?

 

[Pocketman]

... The democrat solution is to cut spending and increase revenue by closing some tax loopholes.

Question: Is the "increase revenue" considered a tax increase and therefore against the Norquist pledge that many Republican's committed to?

 

[jedi]

We all know the numbers. the argument is how to get them under control. In your example the deficit is appx. $17,000 a yr. The republican solution is to cut spending. The democrat solution is to cut spending and increase revenue by closing some tax loopholes. I say the dem way makes more sense. BUT, neither way is going to solve the problem.

Agree from a "statement" point of view that you do need to cut spending and raise your income. That is what Dave Ramesey says in his Baby Step program.

However neither the Rs nor Ds are really willing to do that.
IE. Cut REAL spending and increase REAL taxes. So it's a mute point for those in Congress. As you can see it's we will cut spending in 10 years. We will raise taxes and use that money to spend more as oppose to pay off our debt.

That is the choice we are going to have to make.We are going downhill very fast. Who would have thought we would be seeing London on fire just a year ago. What will be burning next year?

There are plenty of members on this board (rambone comes to mind) that are not suprised by that and have even hinted about it.

You don't know what happens next year? What ROCK are you living under? It's the END OF THE WORLD on 21 DEC 2012 according to the Mayan Calendar.

 

[other guy]

Question: Is the "increase revenue" considered a tax increase and therefore against the Norquist pledge that many Republican's committed to?

Yes, that is the problem, and you really can't blame them. If they break it, or refused to sign on they would be challenged in the primaries for their seat.

 

[Pocketman]

Yes, that is the problem, and you really can't blame them. If they break it, or refused to sign on they would be challenged in the primaries for their seat.

Scenario:
~60% of American pay no or very little income tax. Super Committee proposes a simplified tax code with fewer deductions (loopholes) and overall lower rates. As a result, these lower income people are provided an opportunity to contribute. If such changes increased revenue, the conservatives would not vote for it because of their promise?

Sounds pretty stupid that an elected official would paint ones self into such a corner. Not the people I want to see running the asylum.

EDIT: After a little research, found the actual pledge.

ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and
TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

Based on the above, if the deductions caused lower income wage earners to actually pay, the present 10% rate could still be in play under ONE. TWO would then be problematic because elimination of the tax "deductions and credits" is what afforded these people the opportunity to contribute.

Since lower income people tend to lean Democratic, both sides will oppose such a proposal, even if kept revenue neutral.

 

[Hotdoger]

We all know the numbers. the argument is how to get them under control. In your example the deficit is appx. $17,000 a yr. The republican solution is to cut spending. The democrat solution is to cut spending and increase revenue by closing some tax loopholes. I say the dem way makes more sense. BUT, neither way is going to solve the problem. The problem is all the empty factories in my town and I'm sure your town has a bunch of them too. All of our good factory jobs have been shipped overseas by the job creaters so they could get cheap labor. So i don't know what the solution is. It is not going to get better any time soon. So we are going to have to decide how to spend our dwindling revenue. We can spend it by being the world cop or we can spend it here at home taking care of our own people. That is the choice we are going to have to make.We are going downhill very fast. Who would have thought we would be seeing London on fire just a year ago. What will be burning next year?

Giving them more money to spend makes sense?
It is obvious to any reasonable person they are going to overspend. They have no selfcontrol and are addicts. Till they produce ACTUAL cuts and spend less, it is stupid to feed their addiction or call on others to feed their addiction. .

 

[DragonGunner]

Nobody has mentioned the fact that all the republicans have signed the pledge not to raise taxes period. The dems are willing to go more than hallf way. $4 trillion in cuts, 1 trillion in new revenue,. Seems more than fair to me. But NO, The republicans will stand firm 0 in new revenue. Only cuts, That was their position before and that is their position now. IT MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY. no COMPROMISE

If you have 4 trillion in cuts.....why would you have to raise 1 trillion in new (TAXES) revenue????????????? Thats like me being in debt, an cutting my light bill down, not running the heat so high in winter, fixing the old car for 100.00 instead of buying the 15,000.00 new car, moving from a 800.00 rental to a 300.00 rental, disconnecting the Directv,.....then going to my boss an saying, now that I'm saving hundreds of dollars a month you MUST give me a raise!

The more we TAX, the more we SPEND.....it needs to stop an if the (D) won't do it be thankful somebody is getting it figured out.

 

[Hotdoger]

If you have 4 trillion in cuts.....why would you have to raise 1 trillion in new (TAXES) revenue????????????? Thats like me being in debt, an cutting my light bill down, not running the heat so high in winter, fixing the old car for 100.00 instead of buying the 15,000.00 new car, moving from a 800.00 rental to a 300.00 rental, disconnecting the Directv,.....then going to my boss an saying, now that I'm saving hundreds of dollars a month you MUST give me a raise!

The more we TAX, the more we SPEND.....it needs to stop an if the (D) won't do it be thankful somebody is getting it figured out.

So I can't go to my boss, demand a raise, because I can't control my spending and debt, and tell him he is going to jail and I am going to take his property, if he doesn't pay?

And that sounds like a good plan to some.

 

[other guy]

If you have 4 trillion in cuts.....why would you have to raise 1 trillion in new (TAXES) revenue????????????? Thats like me being in debt, an cutting my light bill down, not running the heat so high in winter, fixing the old car for 100.00 instead of buying the 15,000.00 new car, moving from a 800.00 rental to a 300.00 rental, disconnecting the Directv,.....then going to my boss an saying, now that I'm saving hundreds of dollars a month you MUST give me a raise!

The more we TAX, the more we SPEND.....it needs to stop an if the (D) won't do it be thankful somebody is getting it figured out.

Well because, as in your example, after making all the cuts you mention, you pretty much cut er to the bone, you still have to use the credit card to put food on the table. The cuts helped but did not balance your budget. I guess you could ask your family to live outdoors, or maybe you could nicely ask your boss for a raise, or maybe look for a part time job TO INCREASE REVENUE. That will cut the deficit just the same as cuts to the budjet. Sometimes cuts ar not enough. You need to use all the tools in your toolbox, not limiting yourself to one. As for hotdogs suggestion that "why give them more money ,they will just spend it" They are not wanting to buy anything else, they are simply wanting to borrow less to pay what already has been spent.

 

[other guy]

So I can't go to my boss, demand a raise, because I can't control my spending and debt, and tell him he is going to jail and I am going to take his property, if he doesn't pay?

And that sounds like a good plan to some.

not me

 

[Pocketman]

Well because, as in your example, after making all the cuts you mention, you pretty much cut er to the bone, you still have to use the credit card to put food on the table. The cuts helped but did not balance your budget. I guess you could ask your family to live outdoors, or maybe you could nicely ask your boss for a raise, or maybe look for a part time job TO INCREASE REVENUE. That will cut the deficit just the same as cuts to the budjet. Sometimes cuts ar not enough. You need to use all the tools in your toolbox, not limiting yourself to one. As for hotdogs suggestion that "why give them more money ,they will just spend it" They are not wanting to buy anything else, they are simply wanting to borrow less to pay what already has been spent.

Yes. Even with a balanced budget, there's still the existing credit cards to pay off. Logical solution is to get a part-time job so you can apply the extra income toward the debt. Alternatively, you could sell assets.

 

[other guy]

Yes. Even with a balanced budget, there's still the existing credit cards to pay off. Logical solution is to get a part-time job so you can apply the extra income toward the debt. Alternatively, you could sell assets.

It interesting that you mention selling assets. I wonder whatever happened to all that gold that was supposed to be at Fort Knox. I've never heard of the Gov't selling it. Maybe it was always just a myth. At 1700 an ounce. Maybe they should look at selling some to pay back our debt. Someone should ask one of these people running for president about the gold. Ask were it went? Who sold it? Is it there or not.

 

[Pocketman]

It interesting that you mention selling assets. I wonder whatever happened to all that gold that was supposed to be at Fort Knox. I've never heard of the Gov't selling it. Maybe it was always just a myth. At 1700 an ounce. Maybe they should look at selling some to pay back our debt. Someone should ask one of these people running for president about the gold. Ask were it went? Who sold it? Is it there or not.

People have been asking about the gold for years. Maybe we don't want to know.

 

[9mmfan]

Now that all 12 apostles have been appointed, will they be able to accomplish something positive or will it be gridlock politics as usual?

I would like to be an optimist and believe they will actually propose some worthwhile legislation. A more simple and fair tax code; smaller government; modest Social Security and Medicare reform for starters. My gut tells me neither will do more than token modifications to their respective sacred cows.

What would people like to see from this group and how likely is it we'll see real change?

Simple-NO

 

[jedi]

Well because, as in your example, after making all the cuts you mention, you pretty much cut er to the bone, you still have to use the credit card to put food on the table. The cuts helped but did not balance your budget. I guess you could ask your family to live outdoors, or maybe you could nicely ask your boss for a raise, or maybe look for a part time job TO INCREASE REVENUE. That will cut the deficit just the same as cuts to the budjet. Sometimes cuts ar not enough. You need to use all the tools in your toolbox, not limiting yourself to one. As for hotdogs suggestion that "why give them more money ,they will just spend it" They are not wanting to buy anything else, they are simply wanting to borrow less to pay what already has been spent.

Then you have not cut enough! There are only 3 basic needs that one needs: food, shelter and clothing. Everything else is a luxury and if after you pay for these three you have left over money **AND** are debt free then you can spend on them. Otherwise you give all your "left over money" to pay off your debt.

In the case of the .gov they are not following this.