Compromise at last

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Semi-Strong Louisville, KY
    Dec. 17, 2013 5:36 p.m.


    Because I do not view humans as “sexual animals” either. Rather as sons and daughters of God for whom sexuality is a beautiful and sacred part. A portion of God’s creative power.

    Is God unjust? Nope. Because he does not predestine his creations to eternal suffering. Only a monster would do so.

  • Brer Rabbit Spanish Fork, UT
    Dec. 16, 2013 8:27 p.m.

    I wonder why they only made a COLA cut for the present and future military retirees? Why not a COLA cut for the government workers and Social Security? Could it be because the government workers have unions and the politicians are afraid of the voters when it comes to Social Security? The military is a smaller group without political power, and are not allowed to have a union to support them.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 16, 2013 7:20 p.m.

    Doogie..... the accurate way to measure different time periods is by looking at percentage of income spent to do certain for housing, cut of food from your total check, etc. The dollar value assigned really is really not that important. It how many hours of your day are you working to pay for housing?

    For example, in 1900, the average house cost $5,092 - nationally - or $136,000 in today's dollars. Just looking at that, you would think things now cost more. But that is not an accurate picture. Average wage in 1900 was $432 a year... or $11,612 in constant dollars. The ratio is about 11.8 times annual salary. Todays average house cost per Zillow is just about $160,000. I think that is low, so lets use $200,000. The average US wage in the us is $44,321.67. The ratio of home expense to income is way down to just 4.5 times.

    We spend more now, but it isn't on basics. You cant compare 1900 to 2013, because we spend differently. Or discretionary income is way more than those in 1900 as a percentage of income. Federal reserve or not.

  • Doogie South Jordan, Utah
    Dec. 16, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    UBD Your argument isn't accurate. If the population in my family grows, then I for sure ought to be making more money if I want to stay afloat. Sure budgets grow with additional members but our spending shouldn't increase 5 to 1 over our income. The comment about your car costing more than your first home is example of what our government has done to us. Especially the federal reserve. What cost $1 in 1913 (100 years ago - the year the fed started) now costs $23.59, so prices have increased 2,259% during the Fed's reign. Since 2008, the Fed has dramatically increased the money supply and their balance sheet five times to around $4 trillion and they continue to print an additional $85 billion per month. All this to bail out our economy so they say. What happens when they stop printing? You guessed it, they can't because it is a house a cards. Gov't spending has caused this dilema and things won't get better until they come to their senses and make meaningful cuts.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Dec. 16, 2013 1:40 p.m.

    @patriot – “… those crazy Tea Party conservatives who just wanted a balanced budget and a responsible government.”

    Is there some parallel universe I am unaware of where the Tea Party you describe actually exists?

    The Tea Party here on Earth could care less about balancing the budget – if they did they would have widespread support.

    The only thing our Tea Party cares about is shrinking government down to a size where it can “be drowned in a bathtub.”

    Sadly, our country does not have a political party like the one you describe – instead we’re stuck with the “save our entitlements” party on one side and “kill the government” party on the other, with neither willing to address the real sources of public debt. So yes as long as these two parties fail to compromise we may indeed end up like Greece.

    Let’s just not kid ourselves into thinking one of these parties is making avoiding that future its top priority.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Dec. 16, 2013 1:35 p.m.

    Would a tea party supporter back a deficit agreement deal if it included revenue increases (taxes, fees)? Currently revenues as a percent of GDP (15%) are the lowest since 1950. Under Regean is was mid 17% of GDP. Now that it appears we have turned the corner from the greatest economic melt down since the 1930's is it time to increase our taxes to historic norms and hold spending flat to bring down the deficit?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Dec. 16, 2013 12:30 p.m.

    If you want any more concrete evidence that America is on a free fall decline look no further than this article. We are now cheering for bad government. We are satisfied and accepting of a 17 trillion dollar deficit and have thrown in the towel in trying to fix it. We are ignorantly oblivious to the fact that the day of reckoning is fast approaching when our debt is so high our economy will simply collapse like Greece. When that day of reckoning happens and the entitlements have dried up - the dollar is worthless and our 401k's are disappearing...then what?? Yes compromise is always great isn't it...until those compromises put us all out of work and slam the door on our retirement and our children's futures. I 100% guarantee that there will then be those who make the correct observation that we should have listened to those crazy Tea Party conservatives who just wanted a balanced budget and a responsible government. In the mean time let's eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die... I can't wait for the 2014 election when I change my party affiliation from Republican to Independent..for good!!

  • Kim Cedar Park, Texas
    Dec. 16, 2013 9:10 a.m.

    All this talk of standing on your principles and not compromising is so out of place in this context. There is no absolute truth in politics! What does it mean if two people each stand for different political principles? Is one always wrong and the other always right? Our system of divided government could not function if all of our elected officials felt as many of these commentators feel. Get real folks, our system of government as set up by our founding fathers requires compromise!

  • Ajax Mapleton, UT
    Dec. 16, 2013 9:07 a.m.

    Mike Richards,

    There have been times in my life when I have found that something that I thought was definitely the case quite simply was not. I was wrong. Have you ever had that experience?

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Dec. 16, 2013 8:07 a.m.

    All 4 Utah congressman voted for the compromise but none of them would support something similar in October. Now we're told the savings of this deal are equal to what was lost in the October shutdown. What more evidence do we need that we currently have politicans instead of pragmatic, public servants representing us in Congress?

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 16, 2013 7:23 a.m.

    The tea party is trying to spin out of the whole they dug with Senator Lee. They only know one direction as demonstrated above.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 16, 2013 6:03 a.m.

    RBB... so let me understand your math. You accurately say the budget has grown. Very true. Has the US population grown by any chance in that time? From say 248 million to about 313 million over that time? So in your numbers.... you are completely discounting the fact that the country has also grown over that time.

    Does the first presidency also say you should freeze your budget at yourself and your wife, and that as your family grows, you don't grow your budget with it? That having an increased population should have no effect on your expenses?

    This whole argument that fill-in-the-blank has spent more than all before him is a silly argument. I can guarantee you most people today earn multiples of what their preceding generations did. And likewise, spend more. My car cost more than my first house... it is just the way math and inflation over time work.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 10:02 p.m.


    Yes, I am resistant to paying more in taxes when I know it is simply going to be wasted by the government. In inflation adjusted dollars, Pres. Clinton averaged budgets below $2 Trillion per year every year he was in office. Pres. Obama has spent over $3 Trillion a year every year he has been in office. In so doing, Pres. Obama has amassed more debt than all of presidents up to Clinton, and by the end of his term will have more debt than Washington to Bush II.

    I am more than happy to compromise. You agree to go a back to Clinton spending levels and I will agree to pay more in taxes. That does mean of course, that you will have to give up your subsidized health care and pay your own way. I am willing to sacrifice if you are. If you are not, please do not say I should pay more in taxes until you are paying the same percentage that I am.

    Lets reach a real compromise so we can stop stealing our children's future.

  • Semi-Strong Louisville, KY
    Dec. 15, 2013 6:31 p.m.

    Thankfully a glimmer of sanity.

  • bill in af American Fork, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 3:34 p.m.

    I am amazed at the negative posts. Get real people. Change does not happen over night. This is the closest thing to a bi-partisan compromise that we have seen in Congress in years.
    Our Constitution was founded on compromise. Let's applaud the beginning effort of a step in the right direction even if it is far from perfect. Let's hope it will continue to make a difference in future talks. The tea party has does nothing to help in this process. Time for them to go so sensible people can start communicating for the common good.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 2:57 p.m.

    I would be inclined to buy your moral argument for debt reduction if not for the fact that your side of the aisle refuses to pay any additional taxes towards debt reduction and as soon as anything you all like gets affected by cuts, you whine about it (like the national park closures during the gov't shutdown). You're all for debt reduction, just as long as it's on the backs of others.

  • RBB Sandy, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 1:49 p.m.

    I am really disapointed that the Editorial Board would cheer this "compromise." The church leaders have counseled us to stay out of debt. This compromise is merely an agreement to amass trillions of dollars in new debt. The prior agreement was not great, but at least there was some effort to restrain the rate of growth.

    Do we really have so little concern for our children and grandchildren. Perhaps Moses should have compromised with Pharoh and left the children of Isreal in bondage. Afterall, when things got tough the children of Isreal wanted to return to the flesh pots of Egypt. We have sold our children's birthright for a mess of porridge, but at least we "compromised."

    "Pay off debt as quickly as you can, and free yourself from bondage." Gordon B. Hinkley, Ensign, Nov. 1998.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Dec. 15, 2013 1:37 p.m.

    Every journey of a 100 miles requires i first step of but a few feet. If you don't understand that concept, you will never reach your ultimate goal. Some people just don't get it.

    Dec. 15, 2013 12:36 p.m.

    10CC: Your reference to the polls is amusing at best. I'm impressed that the Tea Party has a 30% rating. After all, they are the enemy of the democrats, the media, and now the RINOs in congress. They have been blamed by this administration for every government failure for the past 5 years. It makes me wonder, If the government is against them then perhaps I should support them.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 12:06 p.m.

    @Mike Richards
    "We still have to borrow more than $1,500,000,000,000 PER YEAR"

    The projected 2013 deficit is around 750 billion, or half of what you're saying.

    "Add to that the huge TAX increase that every family in America will be paying in the form of increased health-care insurance"

    Most families are seeing similarly priced or cheaper health insurance. For instance, my health insurance premiums have increased around 80 dollars a year compared to what it was 3 years ago but my employer switched to a better policy (in that intermediate 3yr period I was on my dad's plan since I was under 26). My sister is on my dad's plan because she's under 26 (thanks Obama). My dad's plan is unchanged. My mom has found an Obamacare exchange plan that would be similar to her pre-Obamacare plan and about 5% cheaper.

    "Look at oil prices. Oil reflects the true value of the dollar"

    No, oil prices reflects the true value of oil. The dollar isn't volatile in a seasonal pattern gaining and losing 25% from winter to summer and back.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 11:27 a.m.

    Tea Partiers disillusioned by this apparent capitulation by Boehner and Ryan may want to consider the general perception of the tea party, in a new Gallup Poll.

    Obama certainly has taken a hit in the polls over time, but the Tea Party has a 30% approval rating, even lower than Obama's.

    Among a demographic that you guys should care about, moderates, that rating is 27%. Republicans are still stinging from the perception hit they took after the government shutdown. Boehner understands it's time to turn around the perception of the GOP, and that's not going to be accomplished by another government shutdown.

    You guys can blame the media, you can blame minorities addicted to government handouts, you can blame liberals in academia, maybe you'll blame some kind of sympathy for Nelson Mandela, but you really ought to be looking yourselves in the mirror, and recognize that you need to adjust.

  • Doogie South Jordan, Utah
    Dec. 15, 2013 8:26 a.m.

    I agree with the author in that compromise is good in certain situations. My opinion is that this circumstance is not one of them. Fiscal conservatives have spent their whole political lives compromising and look where it has lead us the brink of default on our national debt....our influence globally has been slipping because people look at us and see the way we govern and waste our resources and laugh. Kick the can is phrase that is totally overused but it is so applicable. What has caused uncertainty in the markets is not the fiscal conservatives that contrary to what Boehner says still maintain their political clout, but our economic policies. Those who really pay attention and can see through the lies and propaganda know that we can't ride this train much longer without terrible things happening to us and our nation. Their uncertainty lies in knowing that more of the same will come out of Washington not in their inability to compromise!

    Dec. 15, 2013 8:25 a.m.

    Just for the record, this wasn't a compromise, it was a "hope the American people don't notice that we did the same old stuff to avoid responsibility". The old Washington 2 step dance. I am tired of this. I would like to know what benefit the American people get from this "compromise"? More debt, kicking the can down the road to avoid embarrassment during election time? The federal government has no concept of "enough taxation" and when this occurred with England just before our independence from their tyranny we had a "tea party". Time to un-elect these career politicians.

  • David King Layton, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 8:16 a.m.

    And what does all this cooperation get us? A budget deal that does nothing to address Medicare, Social Security, or defense spending (defense spending is actually increased by about $22.4 billion next year above sequester levels).

    I don't think it can be repeated enough that deficit and debt are not the same, and although you admit a $23 billion decrease in the deficit over ten years is small, let's talk about how small that really is. That $23 billion about matches the estimated cost of the government shutdown. Think about that. This budget attempts to deal with our deficit on such a small scale that it takes ten years to undo what the shutdown did. When the government is open, it spends that $23 billion in roughly three days.

    If applied to only this year's deficit, and not over ten years, that $23 billion would mean about a 3% reduction to our 2013 deficit. Not a 3% reduction of our budget. A 3% reduction in how much we'll be in the red this year. But remember that $23 billion is spread out over ten years.

    If this deal represents "cooler" heads and compromise, we've given up fixing our fiscal situation already.

  • Humbly Yours Camas, WA
    Dec. 15, 2013 8:10 a.m.

    Who remembers the picture of a single, seemingly insignificant individual standing in front of a row of tanks during the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989? It's an unforgettable and enduring image from world news. Why?

    The image stirs great emotion. The video replay: even more. When the first tank changes course to go around him, the brave young man steps to the side and again in front, saying in essence - "You must kill me to move passed me."

    This image should be a metaphor to the Deseret News, to American citizens and to ALL about how each of us, as individuals, should feel about compromising principle in the face of great opposition.

    Let us stand on principle, even if we stand alone, and no matter the result.

    We are too results driven. We make decisions on "how we hope things will turn out." I argue that God would have us let HIM worry about all of that, and asks that we simply do the right thing, no matter the tanks, the dire results, the grave consequences. In the end, we'll have been bravely standing where we should've been - next to principle, beside truth and with God.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Dec. 15, 2013 7:42 a.m.

    As the article points out this deal is incredibly minor in scope, but its virtue is primarily in providing some degree of certainty (that Washington is not completely insane – e.g., will default) to the markets.

    More & more economists’ are becoming conceived that the primary reason for our slow growth out of this recession (and the reason corporations are hoarding cash) is our political dysfunction and the unprecedented uncertainty it has injected into our economy.

    Among the far-right conservatives who voted against this deal (including my own congressman), I suspect the more intelligent ones (admittedly tough to figure out these days) know this, which simply is further evidence that these folks are putting party (or Obama hatred or both) ahead of the country.

    For the sake of our economy and country I hope people begin to wake up and in 2014 start sending these arrogant children home (clearly they need more schooling) and return the pragmatic grownups to congress.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Dec. 15, 2013 7:31 a.m.

    I'm mystified with the Deseret News editorial. Will removing the automatic cuts stop our financial ruin? Did someone happen upon an extra $17,000,000,000,000 that was just laying around Washington? We still have to borrow more than $1,500,000,000,000 PER YEAR just to fund the run-away programs coming out of Washington. Add to that the huge TAX increase that every family in America will be paying in the form of increased health-care insurance, and what, exactly does the Deseret News cheer about? What person working in the financial market will sleep better at night, knowing that now, more than ever, his government is racing towards insolvency?

    Our money has lost it's buying power. Look at oil prices. Oil reflects the true value of the dollar much more accurately than any other measure. When oil prices go up, it shows that the value of the dollar has decreased.

    There is nothing to cheer about. There will be NO 10-year spending decrease. Does the Desert News think we're all dupes who can't read history?

    The "budget" is a total failure. A supposedly sane Congress is acting as though it were insane.

  • New to Utah PAYSON, UT
    Dec. 15, 2013 7:02 a.m.

    This is a measured accurate evaluation of where our nation's government sits. We could argue forever about the legitimacy of the 2012 presidential election but the reality is Obama
    is president. The completely partisan Obamacare passage and rollout failure may suggest a major
    shift in governance after the 2014 mid term elections. If the election were held today it is likely Democrats would lose the senate and even more seats in the house but its nearly a year away and much can change.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Dec. 15, 2013 6:03 a.m.

    "The deal does not alter nor reform Social Security, Medicaid or Medicare, three entitlements that combine to make up 60 percent of the budget and are on a runaway trajectory. "

    Until we address these 3 things, everything else is window dressing. Defense should also be in the mix because of its huge budget footprint.

    SS is the easiest, but as the years go by, it gets more painful to fix.

    Medicare and Medicaid are tied to health care costs. As the population ages, these 2 areas will rule the deficit.

    So, I suggest that when anyone brings up the costs of foreign aid, Solyndra, Air Force one,
    Obama's golf, food stamps or unemployment point them strait back to the big 4 above.

    Our politicians would rather talk about the spending of pennies rather than the where the big $$ go. And we blindly follow their lead.

    Let me say again. If the deficit discussion is not about SS, Defense, Medicare and Medicaid, it is ignoring the problem. Period!