Times suggest unique opportunity--Lost.

[deziloooooo]

I find this article from the NY Times a interesting one, it's a bit long, granted, but the debt problem, debt ceiling is a important issue and to deserve more then a one or two liner wouldn't , IMHO , be asking to much and well deserved. [ It is a easy read however]

I find it, article , interesting because it discusses the two principals in the case , the House speaker, the POTUS, and how close they were to a deal, only less then $60 million apart, which for even the most uninformed, when we discuss debt in the many trillions, is what is carried by a country our size in it's pockets as chump change.

It also discusses the problems both parties would have had convincing their own supporters to go along with the plan, both sides were giving in on core planks that define the two parties, but I suggest, isn't that what compromise and good governance is all about, compromise, meeting of the minds.

Now I know some here don't believe that, feel the phrase , "My way or the high way " is the way to go but I don't feel that way and would hope those who feel that way about the highway would be in the minority, and would be relegated to those on the side lines as responsible parties of both sides would come together to settle this problem.

The article points out how both principals have there own problems with their suopporters.
'
Example, the House Speaker :

"Mr. Boehner’s problem is that some otherwise persuadable Republicans worry less about the general election than party primaries, and fear they could draw a conservative rival by supporting a deal with Mr. Obama.

“If that means more to you than getting a plan and stabilizing this economy, you’ve really got to wonder why you’re there,” said Alan K. Simpson, a former Senate Republican leader who was a co-chairman of the bipartisan fiscal commission Mr. Obama set up last year. "


The POTUS :

"And while Mr. Obama also seeks to appeal to independent voters who make the difference in presidential elections, many Democrats complain he is too willing to compromise, potentially disillusioning their party’s voters and muddying the case against Republicans for proposing much deeper entitlement program cuts.

------------------------------
www.nytimes.com/2011/07/26/us/politics/26deal.html?_r=1
------------------------------
[Click on link to read the article, warning again , it's a two pager, but is worth reading, IMHO of course. ]
------------------------------

A ‘Unique Opportunity’ on the Debt Ceiling, LostBy JACKIE CALMES
Published: July 25, 2011

WASHINGTON — Leaders of both parties have said for months that the need to raise the nation’s borrowing limit offered a “unique opportunity” for a bipartisan deal that would constrain the mounting federal debt.

Philip Scott Andrews/The New York Times

"The debate over what Speaker John A. Boehner called the “different visions for our country” he and President Obama represent is likely to define next year's elections, and the blame game.

Instead, it is shaping up to be a lost opportunity.

"Whatever deal Congress and President Obama devise in this final week to allow the government to keep paying its bills after Aug. 2 and avert an economy-rattling default, it almost certainly will fall short of the compromise that Mr. Obama and Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, nearly struck last week — before details of the negotiations leaked, opponents in both parties protested and Mr. Boehner left the table.

The difference between that attempted “grand bargain” and what Congress is coming up with is not just a matter of dollars. Mr. Obama and Mr. Boehner did tentatively agree to more than $3 trillion in savings over 10 years — at least hundreds of billions more than is called for in the fallback plans now bandied about in Congress to clear the way for a vote to increase the $14.3 trillion borrowing ceiling by next Tuesday.

But the more significant difference is in where the savings would come from. The Congressional proposals mainly seek caps on annual spending for domestic and military programs and no additional revenues.

Mr. Obama and Mr. Boehner tentatively agreed to raise $800 billion in revenues after 2013 by overhauling the tax code and getting significant future savings from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security — the entitlement programs whose growth as the population ages is driving long-term projections of unsustainable debt. While Republicans rebelled at the idea of tax increases, the package’s total spending cuts exceeded new revenues by more than three to one. "

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...this country was founded on "my way or the highway," so don't underestimate it...

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...fwiw, my favorite so far in these myriad threads on the debt/deficit discussions is:

"YOU, SHALL NOT, PASS!"

;D

[deziloooooo]

Jul 28, 2011 10:48:58 GMT -5 BeenThere...DoneThat... said:

...fwiw, my favorite so far in these myriad threads on the debt/deficit discussions is:

"YOU, SHALL NOT, PASS!"

;D

That's a good one for the headlines but accomplishes little, and this problem, if left to those who just like rhetoric to impress their constituents is going to cause us some very serious problems, that will hurt just about all of us.

Since most of us are just average folks, the better off will find it much easier to ride it out, the hurt put on most of us does nothing to solve our problems and after reading through the article three times, it seems the opportunity lost was a very good start in solving what we all admit is a problem, the deficit, the spending, and the programs that are necessary..possible not the finite solution but would allow us to have a big start on the problem of deficits and spending and then allow the election to go forward and let the principals who would be participating present their ideas to the electorate and allow THEM to decide where we should go from here on in.

Is that such a bad idea?

[deziloooooo]

Jul 28, 2011 10:47:45 GMT -5 BeenThere...DoneThat... said:

...this country was founded on "my way or the highway," so don't underestimate it...

I don't underestimate it but if I gave you that ultimatum and say another that seems to get some play here.."Deal with it ", I am sure you would get your hackles up in a uproar, and then what would we accomplish..in my mind , not very much.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...well, you've repeated that the electorate will make their views known about what we want done to address the spending issues... isn't that we're doing?

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

>>> that will hurt just about all of us. <<<

...and we're all going to be "hurt," anyway...

[deziloooooo]

Jul 28, 2011 11:58:06 GMT -5 BeenThere...DoneThat... said:

...well, you've repeated that the electorate will make their views known about what we want done to address the spending issues... isn't that we're doing?

no just a lot of noise..what about the article , did you take the time to read it, it touches on both sides here..equally, and if rerad, realy a easy read, can you see the point of it, seemed to have been a good deal, and intelligent way out of this mes for now, or do you feel "Nope, my way or the high way, and if it means a default, so be it?"

If so, then what in your opinion was so negative about the possible agreement, seemed to go a long way toward addressing the deficit, spending, possible not on all points but since when is everything going to be only one way?

[djAdvocate]

it won't be the first time that stubbornness has sunk a ship. i am imagining Rome fell this way. not by strength from without, but by weakness within.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...why do you discount views as "noise"? and this article is yet another in a long line of them...
...some people want major cuts to spending... some people want major hikes in taxes... I'm all for revoking the EITC... that would be a tax hike... why not do that? even for a year? or two? or twenty?
...that would cut spending and hike taxes at the same time... sounds like a good compromise...

...the bottom line here is that we need to cut spending a LOT and raise the debt ceiling a LITTLE, if at all... I think it's fair to say that a lot of people agree with me... and I think maybe you do, too?

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

Jul 28, 2011 12:10:58 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

it won't be the first time that stubbornness has sunk a ship. i am imagining Rome fell this way. not by strength from without, but by weakness within.

...you are exactly right... stubbornness has gotten us into this mess...

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...btw, dez... your writer penned another article that I found interesting, too... and speaks to why $60 billion, iow, your "chump change," can define the chasm we face...

Behind Battle Over Debt, a War Over Government
By JACKIE CALMES
Published: July 14, 2011

WASHINGTON — The endgame in the fight to increase the nation’s debt limit has only begun, but intense exchanges this week between the two parties have made it clear that this is not so much a negotiation over dollars and cents as a broader clash between the two parties over the size and role of government.

What makes a bipartisan “grand bargain” so elusive is less the budget numbers, on which compromise could be in reach, than each side’s principles, which do not lend themselves to splitting the difference. President Obama wants deficit reduction, including tax increases for wealthier Americans and corporations. Congressional Republicans, prodded by a cadre of junior lawmakers, want a vastly smaller government constrained by lower taxes. The two are not the same thing.

www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/us/politics/15deficit.html?ref=jackiecalmes

[handyman2]

What I do not understand is that the opposing parties are always saying a bill will not pass or the president will veto it before the context of the bill is even complete. To me it is saying lets default. I can see why Boehner has gotten frustrated.

[djAdvocate]

Jul 28, 2011 19:34:13 GMT -5 handyman2 said:

What I do not understand is that the opposing parties are always saying a bill will not pass or the president will veto it before the context of the bill is even complete. To me it is saying lets default. I can see why Boehner has gotten frustrated.

i think the president has seen draft versions of the bills, don't you?

[deziloooooo]

Jul 28, 2011 19:34:13 GMT -5 handyman2 said:

What I do not understand is that the opposing parties are always saying a bill will not pass or the president will veto it before the context of the bill is even complete. To me it is saying lets default. I can see why Boehner has gotten frustrated.

Handy this are adults, professionls , they have discussed all aspects of these items..there are no secrets here..just the dotting of the eyes..crossing of the T's..basically they know what they are discussing and the details ..

[handyman2]

ADULTS? Then why do they not act like it. Example The house leader after the cut, cap and trade bill was rejected by Reid. Boehner said he was going back and redo a new bill, Reid 20 minutes later said this on live television( What ever the bill will be it will not pass the Senate) now you are going to tell me Reid knew what was in the bill that had not even been drafted yet. I see a game here. Reid is dead set in my view of forcing a default and then try to convince the electorate it was the Republicans fault and destroying the party. Let me also add I am not a Republican. But from my view there is something bigger going on here.

[deziloooooo]

Jul 28, 2011 21:26:57 GMT -5 handyman2 said:

ADULTS? Then why do they not act like it. Example The house leader after the cut, cap and trade bill was rejected by Reid. Boehner said he was going back and redo a new bill, Reid 20 minutes later said this on live television( What ever the bill will be it will not pass the Senate) now you are going to tell me Reid knew what was in the bill that had not even been drafted yet. I see a game here. Reid is dead set in my view of forcing a default and then try to convince the electorate it was the Republicans fault and destroying the party. Let me also add I am not a Republican. But from my view there is something bigger going on here.

Any one of these people who purposly want a default should be put up against a wall and ...that's how I see it and I don't care what party they belong to..it will be a calamaty that we do not need ever and especially right now.