Published: Tuesday, July 31 2012 11:48 p.m. MDT
We need both higher taxes and lower spending. The American people don't
want to hear the truth, so you we really can't blame our politicians for
not telling us.
"an expensive but underfunded government without any serious plan for making
revenues and expenditures match,""serious plan" is the
key here. Neither party wants to do what is necessary. And neither party has
put forth a plan to make revenue and expenditures match.The Dems
dont want to hit entitlements too hard and the GOP has vowed to NOT raise taxes
one cent.And both sides get what they really want. STALEMATE. They
get status quo. The GOP would be in a real pickle if they had the
numbers to pass the Ryan budget. They are very happy voting for budgets that
they know can not pass.Fixing the budget will take massive spending
cuts and modest tax increases.The "we dont have a taxing
problem, we have a spending problem" crowd has yet to show how to put that
bumper sticker slogan into a solution. And, the reasonable people know it
cannot be done.If the right continues to take a NO COMPROMISE
approach, nothing will change. And the resulting non solution is
worse than a bipartisan agreement. But too many are now so hard
line right that they cant see it.
It would be pretty awesome if you could get some news articles that were simply
news with facts and relevant data than a few supposed facts with large amounts
of opinion thrown in. Let people make up their own mind about how to feel about
things rather than telling them how to feel.
Grr! My apologies in regard to my last comment. When I first saw the story it
wasn't under the opinion heading. Thus, my rant that an article
was full of opinion when it is, in fact, an opinion article is unjustified.
@ Roland. It doesn’t matter how much taxes we pay if the government
doesn’t spend less! And the Obama administration has demonstrated it will
not cut spending!
When you have a polarized party system that considers "compromise" a
dirty word and leadership in the Republican Party stating that they want to make
the President fail at any and all costs, "kicking the can a little farther
down the road" is about the best you can expect.
Re Roland Kayser: "We need both higher taxes and lower spending. The
American people don't want to hear the truth, so you we really can't
blame our politicians for not telling us." Minor addition to your excellent
comment we need higher tax revenues devoted solely and specifically to reduce
debt. Just having increased revenues have never led either to less debt or
lower spending. And, the budget for lower spending needs to be approved before
revenues are in place. Otherwise, the reduced spending never will come.
In 2008 Obama derided George Bush for using a Chinese credit card, calling in
irresponsible and unpatriotic. Obama and the Dems have made Bush's spending
look small. It's time for a regime change.
"And the Obama administration has demonstrated it will not cut
spending!"Mountanman .Care to tell me which
president or congress HAS demonstrated that it WILL CUT SPENDING?From what I have seen, it is neither party.
@mountanmanWhich party is it that very much wants to avoid scheduled and
passed spending cuts that go into effect January 1st? Oh right, the Republicans.
Many posters are partially correct. We need more tax revenues and less
spending. Unfortunately the liberals only know of one way of generating more
revenues, and that is by raising rates. The best way to raise revenues is to
get more people working. If you liberals could figure out how to inspire the
assurance and stability in government that businesses are seeking we can get
more businesses hiring. Many CEOs of large companies state that Obama's
erratic and unpredictable nature with respect to business regulation is what
makes them not want to hire.To "Emajor" why should
conservatives compromise on something that is bad for the country. Would you
have your daughter compromise her values when out on a date?
" If you liberals could figure out how to inspire the assurance and
stability in government "Hmm, looked to me like the economy
started tanking under GOP leadership. I guess the conservatives
"couldn't figure out how to inspire the assurance and stability in
government"either.Nice try red. But, we were ALREADY
bleeding 700,000 jobs per month when Obama was elected.
@RedShirt"Many CEOs of large companies state that Obama's erratic
and unpredictable nature with respect to business regulation is what makes them
not want to hire."I don't buy that for one second. If there
is such a problem with regulation, why are there so many companies out there
making record profits? Why are these same companies still laying people off?The answer is because they have discovered that people will put up with
about anything in order to keep their job because there aren't a lot of
jobs out there. Thus, work your few employees hard enough to make up for the
slack. Pay them poorly, cut their benefits and then show them the door whenever
you feel like picking up someone even cheaper.Do you really think
these companies are going to acknowledge that greed is their motivator? Of
course not, they're going to pass the blame onto the easiest target.
So then "Joe Blow" blaming the previous administration is going to solve
the problem? Those who live in the past are doomed to die in the past. It is
time to move on to the present.It is now time for solutions. So
far, neither Congress (Democrats or Republicans) nor the Administration is
willing to come up with workable solutions."Roland,"
economists and the Federal Reserve have been clearly telling us that raising
taxes and lowering governmental expenditures (right now in this fragile economy)
will not solve the problem. If anything, they are saying it will likely send
the economy into a double-dip recession.
@RedshirtA large portion of the uncertainty comes from the republicans who
at times have wanted to do things like smash into the debt ceiling limit.
To "JoeBlow" and what is your point? Bush, with the help of Obama, set
into motion the public policies that kept bleeding jobs. You forget that Bush
was a Progressive, which is not a conservative.If you look at the
BLS numbers, when congress was run by Democrats, and we tried their plans there
was nearly 0 job growth. Once Congress had its control split, job creation took
off. Why did it happen like that?According to some economists, the
best party to control congress is neither. It is best to have congress so busy
fighting with itself. With congress in continual gridlock businesses don't
have to worry about much in terms of new regulation and taxes. However, Obama
has found that he can use executive orders and federal agencies to bring about
his agenda.To "ThatsSoUtah" and "alt134" read
"Stop Bashing Business, Mr. President" in the WSJ and "Obama
Secretly Courts Big Business" in the Daily Beast. There 2 CEOs are quite
clear about how Obama and his policies make them scared to expand and end up
making the companies lay off employees.
Bush was a progressive????? That's a good one.
Redshirt,"why should conservatives compromise on something that is bad
for the country. Would you have your daughter compromise her values when out on
a date"Oh dear, talk about comparing apples to kumquats.
It's telling that you view national fiscal policy with the same absolutism
as you do your religious moral codes. Here's the problem with
that: economists can't agree on how to get the economy back on track. Some
say the stimulus was necessary, others say it makes matters worse. Multiple
hypotheses, and no control group with which to test them. You think the economy
is ruined because of Obama's policies, but you have no idea what this
economy would be like if McCain/Palin had been in office since 2008. It may have
been worse. Or better. Here's the difference between you and I on this: I
won't say that the economy would have been worse with a republican in
office. Because, like you, I can't prove it. When you can travel back in
time and change the course of the 2008 election, let me know how the economy
looks during Alternate Reality 2012.
Redshirt,Sorry, but I've got to blabber on again. You seem to be
putting a lot of faith in what CEOs think should be done. JP Morgan Chase just
lost, what, perhaps $9 billion in bad investments, despite prior reassurances
from its CEO that they were not engaged in risky investments? If a CEO
didn't see that coming within his own company, why should I believe what
some say about national economic policy?
There is a simple solution to this problem. Instead of 50% of Americans paying
taxes, lets have "all" Americans pay their fair share. Instead of
blaming each political party, let's just face the facts that both parties
are to blame for the problems we now have. Why? Well, because the average
American was "trusting" his or hers elected offical to do what should be
good for America. We were working, raising our families, paying our taxes and
the government official kept spending and spending and then it was gone.
Imangine that! Yet, we still look to the government to fix the
problem. What a foolish thought. We need the courage to force term limits,
live within our means and stop expecting hand outs. Someone somewhere is paying
for the handout. It is not the government. It is the people paying the taxes.
The 50% taking care of all the rest that think there is a money tree in
Washington. Oh yea, I forgot there is, it is called the Federal Reserve and
they print fiat money. It is worth the value of the paper it is printed on. You
can pay more taxes-I am taxed out.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments