House to consider no pay bill until Senate passes

[g8orbill]

a budget

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/budget-Congress-debt-ceiling/2013/01/18/id/472141?s=al&promo_code=121CC-1

From the article:


“We are going to pursue strategies that will obligate the Senate to finally join the House in confronting the government’s spending problem," Boehner continued.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said that next week Congress will authorize the temporary debt limit to give the Senate and the House time to pass a budget.

"The first step to fixing this problem is to pass a budget that reduces spending," the Virginia Republican said. "The House has done so, and will again. The Democratic Senate has not passed a budget in almost four years, which is unfair to hardworking taxpayers who expect more from their representatives. That ends this year."

[Emmitto]

I like it. I notice there are no details. And a funny little Constitutional issue that might "prevent" it.

Sounds like standard Congressional nothingness.

[madgator]

I may be wrong here. But I believe the only actual vote that the senate has done in the past 2-3 years was on Obama care.


what have they been doing?

[gator996]

You are wrong.

[g8orbill]

They have passed other things including the costly continuous resolution to increase our spending and keep from passing an actual budget

[corpgator]

Well let's see. The dems hold a majority in the Senate and want to pass their legislation. The repubs are in the minority and want none of it to pass, so they filibuster ALL of it. Ironic that repubs then blame dems for not passing anything.

Meanwhile, the house passes everything they want and the dems can do nothing about it.

So, the reps want only their bills passed in the entire government even while controlling only one branch and that was after losing the popular vote there.

There's one party that should be looking more to compromise, but all they do is obstruct.

[g8orbill]

problem is that for you dems- compromise only means pubs coming to the left-the dems never move to the right

[fredsanford]

problem is that for you dems- compromise only means pubs coming to the left-the dems never move to the right

Wrong

[g8orbill]

Wrong

Please show me where I am wrong

[mocgator]

Wrong

No. 100% correct.

[mdgator05]

Please show me where I am wrong

The inclusion of tax cuts for about 1/3 of the stimulus bill. The dropping of a public option in healthcare reform.

[Matthanuf06]

The inclusion of tax cuts for about 1/3 of the stimulus bill. The dropping of a public option in healthcare reform.

Sort of the aim for the stars and if you miss you'll still land on the moon strategy?

That isn't real compromise. That's like if the right had their starting point at abolishing the income tax and "compromised" by having a flat 5% tax.

[mdgator05]

Sort of the aim for the stars and if you miss you'll still land on the moon strategy?

That isn't real compromise. That's like if the right had their starting point at abolishing the income tax and "compromised" by having a flat 5% tax.

Yes compromising to the right by giving up on a healthcare system that is more conservative than just about any other first-world country (most places have Single-Payer not Public Option) is the equivalent of the right accepting a 5% flat tax. That is only true if you examine the world from the extreme right of the political system.

[g8orbill]

just because other countries have a single payer is that a reason to scrap our system for this socialized system? that is like when a child says, Tommy gets to do it! What a pile of horse manure

[PITBOSS]

what specific cuts do the house repubs want?

[Gatoragman]

There may some issues but what a concept, do you job or you don't get paid!

[g8orbill]

pitt- to become solvent we have to make cuts across the board(including SS and medicare/medicaid) and we also have to scrap the baseline budgeting system currently in use

[orangeblueorangeblue]

You cannot "cut" debt, dad. That's the problem with "cutting" Social Security. Medicare and Defense comprise 85% of our non-debt budget. You can cut everything else down to 0 and we'd still run a deficit.

[g8orbill]

obob- if you run a true surplus you can reduce your debt- to do that you have to reduce your spending to less than you take in

the problem is that most of the idiots we have in DC do not really care about how much we overspend as long as they maintain their power-they are afraid since so many are now dependent on the guvment that they will lose if they don't continue along the same garden path

[orangeblueorangeblue]

obob- if you run a true surplus you can reduce your debt- to do that you have to reduce your spending to less than you take in

the problem is that most of the idiots we have in DC do not really care about how much we overspend as long as they maintain their power-they are afraid since so many are now dependent on the guvment that they will lose if they don't continue along the same garden path

Uh, no offense but what does any of that have to do with what I just posted?

[g8orbill]

You cannot "cut" debt, dad. That's the problem with "cutting" Social Security. Medicare and Defense comprise 85% of our non-debt budget. You can cut everything else down to 0 and we'd still run a deficit.

this

[orangeblueorangeblue]

I still don't follow. The primary point was Social Security cannot - in a technical sense - be cut. The remainder of the deficit is caused by Medicare and DOD. It makes up *more* than 85% if I recall correctly, so focusing on the Department of Internal Toad Conservation is nothing more than a symbolic gesture.

[g8orbill]

I disagree and think SS could be cut and should be cut- it won;'t be easy and would take several years but it could be done
first step would be to move the mandatory retirement age to 68
then I would tell anyone under 45 they need to make other plans and that while they would still pay in-they would never see a dime from SS-I can hear the howls now about how unfair that is-yet those howling seem to have no problem with raising the taxes on the wealthy as it is so unfair for them to make so much and besides they do not need all they make

[orangeblueorangeblue]

If you needed to cut your home budget could you "cut" your AMEX bill?

[g8orbill]

obob- I do not have any credit cards-if I cannot pay cash, I just do not do whatever it is that we were looking at doing

so yes if I needed to cut my home budget I would cut my spending(and your example of an amex bill is a result of spending)

[mocgator]

You cannot "cut" debt, dad. That's the problem with "cutting" Social Security. Medicare and Defense comprise 85% of our non-debt budget. You can cut everything else down to 0 and we'd still run a deficit.

Simple math..

http://liberty.com/sites/default/files/emvideo-youtube-EW5IdwltaAc.jpg

[orangeblueorangeblue]

obob- I do not have any credit cards-if I cannot pay cash, I just do not do whatever it is that we were looking at doing

so yes if I needed to cut my home budget I would cut my spending(and your example of an amex bill is a result of spending)

Well this ignores the point entirely.

Let me put it this way ... if you ignore debt something bad happens.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Simple math..

Uh huh. And if you do that math you realize that without defense & medicare/medicaid cuts we cannot run a budget surplus.

If you cut EVERY discretionary program (military and non-military) and leave DOD, SS, Medicaid/care in tact, we run a $150B deficit.

That is EVERY SINGLE DISCRETIONARY PROGRAM.