Comments about ‘Robert Bennett: Raising the debt limit is necessary’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Oct. 7 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

Doug 10

I can play that math game too.

ALL the revenue from taxes won't cover SS, medicare, and unemployment. If we borrowed no more, we couldn't take care of entitlements, even if we had ZERO military. We couldn't pay the interest on the debt either. And all those parks that are closed, would have to be run by volunteers. Every discretionary program would have to go.

We have to address and curtail entitlements, not add another one called the ACA, or anything else.

A raise in the debt ceiling must have a spending ceiling too, or it will be meaningless in the long haul.

The only real hope to fix this is to get all able Americans working productively, to raise the economy so much that the increased revenue can cover what we already owe. NO HOPE of that CHANGE with this president. Employment and income is still diminishing.

So far the federal government has lived by "Eat, drink, and be merry, for soon we will be broke!" I am not so young, but I can see disaster coming in my lifetime.

Badgerbadger
Murray, UT

Mountanman

Great example!!!! Only we are a fairly well of country, relatively speaking. Perhaps we should put one zero back on so the liberal posters can see how a upper middle class family ends up bankrupt. (Yes, this does happen.)

* Annual family income: $217,000
* Money the family spent: $392,000
* New debt on the credit card: $175,000
* Outstanding balance on the credit card: $1,727,100
* Total budget cuts so far: $38.50

We have a spending problem. We are trying to live a 400K lifestyle on a 200K income. It doesn't work. (But when we talk numbers, liberals tune out, or go to sleep, which why they don't get it.)

christoph
Brigham City, UT

We would have run out of money earlier in the year, yet us raising the taxes of the rich in 2013, has postponed this need to raise credit limit. Things are good. Economy is growing, and deficit is dropping, wars are ending, and costs of health care are dropping. We will be okay; all agree tax code should be made simple, then we just need to reform Medicare and Medicaid.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

@Mountanman
Hayden, ID

Shaun. Baloney. A Federal Budget Lesson for you.

Let's now remove 8 zeros and pretend it's a household budget:

* Annual family income: $21,700
* Money the family spent: $39,200
* New debt on the credit card: $17,500
* Outstanding balance on the credit card: $172,710
* Total budget cuts so far: $3.85
Got It !!!!!
3:34 p.m. Oct. 7, 2013

===========

Nice example.
Just remember, that in order to balance that budget 2 things need to happen.

1. reduce spending,
2. INCREASE revenue

That means Raising taxes, doesn't it?
Something Republicans have been dead set against.

Also remember, that 80% of ALL wealth in America belongs to the 1%.
Something Republicans have also been dead set against.

Joey D
WEST VALLEY CITY, UT

Why do we listen to anyone who helped put us in this situation? We just keep digging the hole bigger and bigger.

glendenbg
Salt Lake City, UT

@procuradorfiscal - "Sure it is -- but only because of the deranged spending spree liberals have been on for the last 40+ years."

I get that liberals aren't your thing, but if we're going to discuss federal budgets, let's be honest.

Going back 40 years to 1973, deficits were consistent but not huge. Starting with the Reagan administration spending and deficits exploded. Reagan raised taxes six times, but his budgets increased spending even faster. The first Bush administration raised taxes. The Clinton administration raised taxes (without a single Republican vote) in a deficit reduction plan that succeeded in creating surpluses by the late 1990s.

According to the non-partisan Center for Budget and Policy priorities, Federal deficits since 2001 have had four primary causes - the Bush tax cuts (of 2001 and 2003), the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan and the economic crash of 2008. Absent those four factors, we'd currently be running a small surplus or a very small deficit.

Our problem isn't liberal spending on programs of social uplift. Too many of us believe the lie that we can tax cut our way to prosperity.

Gordon Jones
Draper, Utah

When Bennett took office, the national debt stood at about $6 trillion. By the time he left it had grown to about $14 trillion.

During his 18 years in the Senate, Bob Bennett voted for 132 out of 133 appropriations bills on final passage in the Senate. Appropriations bills are the bills that actually spend the money.

The size of this debt and its growth trend is what should concern us far more than today's fight. The Congressional Budget Office warns that "the high and rising amount of debt that CBO projects under the extended baseline would have significant negative consequences for both the economy and the federal budget."

Yes, there is a short-term problem, but the long-term problem is horrendous. Congressional Republicans are attempting to get a handle on that long-term problem, a problem for which Bob Bennett shares responsibility.

JoeCapitalist2
Orem, UT

Open Minded Mormon: "Just remember, that in order to balance that budget 2 things need to happen. 1. reduce spending, 2. INCREASE revenue That means Raising taxes, doesn't it?"

NO it doesn't! Liberals wrongly think that raising tax RATES == increased tax REVENUES. It doesn't.

If we want to increase revenues to the government we need more people to go back to work and pay taxes. That means we need a robust economy where businesses can grow and hire new people. It means letting working Americans keep more of their paycheck so that the difference between working and being un-employed or "disabled" incentivizes more people to work.

BTW: I completely disagree with your premise that we even need more tax revenues. The government currently brings in about $2.5 TRILLION annually (more than it ever has). That should be more than enough for the government to provide its necessary functions.

Unfortunately, even if it were $10 trillion a year, it wouldn't fund all the things liberals want the government to do. We have a SPENDING problem not a REVENUE problem.

Gildas
LOGAN, UT

Who voted in this Congress of Drunken Sailors? Nope, I didn't, I supported people like Ron Paul and looked in vain for people like Jim DeMint and Ted Cruz on many of our local polls.

I did tentatively support Mike Lee and am now glad that I did.

This insanity has got to stop, and it would be a good thing if we did not rail on the few sane people in the Congress who try to stop the madness and do not want to put off taking a stand - yet again.

Wake up America!!

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "Just remember, that in order to balance that budget 2 things need to happen."

And, since Obama has already imposed the largest tax increase in America's history, isn't it about time we started with the the spending cuts?

Re: "Our problem isn't liberal spending on programs of social uplift."

Our problem is deranged spending -- period. Blame American politics' irrational profligacy on whoever you like, we just need it to STOP.

The glaring, obvious problem liberals won't come to terms with is that we simply spend too much. They'd clearly rather blame Republicans than actually address the problem.

It's as if they feel entitled, as a matter of "fairness," to another 40 years of manic profligacy, to match the last 40. And, they're unwilling to discuss sanity until they get it.

Remember Dr. Einstein and his definition of insanity.

It clearly applies to ALL political vote-buying.

procuradorfiscal
Tooele, UT

Re: "The Clinton administration raised taxes (without a single Republican vote) in a deficit reduction plan that succeeded in creating surpluses by the late 1990s."

Yeah -- a deficit reduction plan that only worked and created surpluses because Reagan-era and Clinton-era, Republican-Congress spending controls were in effect.

You won't get an argument from real Americans on the issue that deranged spending by liberals in both parties is to blame.

But, regardless of who you blame -- insane, out-of-control spending has simply got to stop.

Perpetuating business-as-usual, politically-motivated, vote-buying spending -- as Congressional and Obama-regime liberals are currently holding America hostage for -- will never produce a fiscally sane result.

It simply can't happen. Ever.

1covey
Salt Lake City, UT

To those who say (then) Senator Bennett did nothing, what ignorance. Spending and all other bills require voting; if you are in the minority on a particular vote, you have done all you can. To be accused of complicity in the passing of that measure is false accusation. We as a nation are where we are because of the demands of a majority, no matter how narrow the divide. America, blame yourself. It is frustrating; men like Lee have difficulty in dealing with it. Men like Bennett have difficulty, also, but deal with it better than the Lees. Pure and not-so-simple.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments