ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jul 26, 2011 12:55:04 GMT -5
I did not hear.Wasn't that what they originally wanted?Spending cuts with no revenue increases?
|
|
handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on Jul 26, 2011 13:12:11 GMT -5
The Dems plan counted savings from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afganistan which the Repubs did not figure that was a given the way things have gone so they wanted more positive commitments from the Dems. Which the way things have gone I can understand.
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jul 26, 2011 13:14:23 GMT -5
I thought they used that in their budget.
|
|
|
Post by maui1 on Jul 26, 2011 13:16:48 GMT -5
the gop would like the dems to write something down, so they can be held accountable for something.
does this sound like to much to ask?
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jul 26, 2011 13:37:55 GMT -5
I thought that was what the tea party candidates said of Boehners plan.
|
|
safeharbor37
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 23:18:19 GMT -5
Posts: 1,290
|
Post by safeharbor37 on Jul 26, 2011 14:08:18 GMT -5
There are a number of differences between what the Democrats and Republicans want and also between what the more extreme branches of those parties want and the more mainstream Dem/Repubs, but the big difference between the two sides is the emphasis on either increased revenues or expense cuts. The Dems tend to muddy the water by considering tax cuts as expense or some such distortion which promotes their agenda [which in many cases can't be promoted or even defended rationally]. The Tea Party Republicans tend to be so rigid that it is essentially, "My way or the highway." so it's hard to get a rational discussion going. Unfortunately the President, Sen. Reid and Speaker Boehner all let the politics of the matter override a good solution. "Entitlements" like Medicare, Social Security, etc. must be on the table in in real discussion of a solution, compromise or not. Likewise, tax revenue is a part of any realistic solution and there is a choice of increased tax rates or the closing of loopholes as well as eliminating or minimizing of subsidies. The real problem is that all sides [except perhaps for some tea partiers] tend to distort the facts to make their political positions seem more desirable than they really are. In other words, There's a lot of lying going on. It's abstractly interesting to see a discussion among a group all of whom are essentially liars. Realistically it's depressing.
|
|