Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 59

Thread: If you want $2 trillion in cut, Start here.

  1. #1
    Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358

    If you want $2 trillion in cut, Start here.

    Reid To Boehner: If You Want $2 Trillion In Cuts, Start With Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

    WASHINGTON -- Less than a day after House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) demanded that the debt ceiling not be lifted unless the government reduce spending by $2 trillion, Democrats are calling his bluff.

    Senate Democratic leadership is asking Boehner to reaffirm support for ending tax breaks to five of the top oil companies as part of his quest to achieve federal savings.

    “You can't talk about cuts without first looking at eliminating the giveaways to big oil. It should start there,” Jon Summers, a top spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), said in a statement. “We agree we have to cut spending, but it is ridiculous for Republicans to push a plan to kill Medicare while trying to defend taxpayer handouts to big oil companies that are making record profits. They don't need the money. If Republicans are serious about cutting spending, they'll support our plan to eliminate welfare for Big Oil so we can apply that money toward the deficit.”

    Summer’s retort comes just hours after Boehner upped the stakes over the debt ceiling debate: He told a Wall Street crowd that his caucus would not sign off on raising the limit -- which stands at $14.3 trillion -- unless it was attached to strict spending reductions. Tax increases, he added, are off the table.

    “Without significant spending cuts and changes in the way we spend the American people’s money, there will be no increase in the debt limit. And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in the debt limit that the president is given,” Boehner said in an address to the Economic Club of New York. The timeframe for the cuts would be longer than the life of the debt limit increase, meaning that it would be implemented over the course of, likely, several years.

    The natural response would be to ask Boehner to actually pinpoint the cuts that he wants. But Senate Democrats are choosing a slightly different tact: proposing their own deficit reduction measures and daring Republicans to object.

    Repealing oil company tax breaks is something that Boehner briefly said he would considered supporting before cautioning that he wouldn’t back a policy that could hurt domestic suppliers. Democrats responded by tailoring the proposal so that it hit just the top five companies. Ending their breaks could save the government $21 billion over ten years.

  2. #2
    Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    Let me quess, S&L wants to preserve these tax breaks.

  3. #3
    Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    Let me quess, S&L agrees with everything Boehner says.

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/42973413

    The White House took a dim view Tuesday of Republicans' demand that President Obama accept more than $2 trillion in spending cuts in exchange for their agreement to raise the $14.3 trillion U.S. debt limit.

    House Speaker John Boehner, the top Republican in the U.S. Congress, Monday laid down a tough new yardstick in talks over the U.S. debt, saying spending cuts must exceed any boost to the U.S. borrowing limit.

    White House spokesman Jay Carney said both Democrats and Republicans agree on the need for deficit reduction. But it would be tantamount to holding the U.S. economy "hostage" by tying the debate over the U.S. debt limit to budget cuts, he said.

    "To hold one hostage to the other remains extremely unwise," Carney told reporters on Air Force One as Obama flew to Texas.

    The White House believes Obama has already offered a balanced plan that would achieve $4 trillion without cutting entitlement programs for the elderly and poor.

    A senior White House official told Reuters that Obama agrees debt reduction is an urgent priority and the president has offered a "balanced, fair plan" for $4 trillion in deficit reduction, a senior White House official said.

    "But it is simply irresponsible to declare that you will tank the U.S. economy if you don't get what you want," the official said.

  4. #4
    SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    Like I said, I think it is pretty small. $21 B over a decade. That's lower than the $4 B per year number I cited previously (that you questioned).

    On one side Boehner wants to cut $2 trillion and the dems come back with 0.1% of that amount to start. It's not real discourse. It's party politics - the dems are playing to anti corporate left. Personally, like I said before, give it to them and move on to a real discussion.

    You know the trade deficit increased last month even though we exported more goods than we have in 20 years. The problem? Foreign oil dependancy. Alternative energy is fine, but we need to run our country today as well. Here's the article: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011...er=rss&emc=rss

  5. #5
    Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    Thats silly S&L. You are back to your distorting ways. President Obama has proposed 4 trillion in cuts.
    Stop with the ridiculous comments about Dems coming back with 0.1% of the Republican amount.
    That was one item out of many that have been discussed. This is EXACTLY what i was talking about
    when you demean Dems.whenever you get an opportunity.
    The Republicans have made defense spending, and tax raises of any kind off limits.
    Almost every expert, including people on wall street, say its absurd to keep revenues raises off the table.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 05-11-2011 at 02:35 PM.

  6. #6
    SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Thats silly S&L. You are back to your distorting ways. President Obama has proposed 4 trillion in cuts.
    Stop with the ridiculous comments about Dems coming back with 0.1% of the Republican amount.
    That was one item out of many that have been discussed. This is EXACTLY what i was talking about
    when you demean Dems.whenever you get an opportunity.
    The Republicans have made defense spending, and tax raises of any kind off limits.
    Almost every expert, including people on wall street, say its absurd to keep revenues raises off the table.
    You're moving the target. The article is about Boehner "demanding" $2 Trillion in cuts to raise the debt limit, and the dems (Reid) coming back with "start here" (21 B over 10 years). Are we not talking about the posted article? Am I missing something?

    Mathematics is not ridiculous. 2.1 billion is indeed 0.1% of 2 trillion. OK, let's talk over a ten year period as a basis because that's important for clarity, then it's 1%. And you editorialize it that I'm demeaning dems and distorting.... C'mon dude? Really? Call a spade a spade. Tell it like it is.
    Last edited by SiriuslyLong; 05-11-2011 at 03:09 PM.

  7. #7
    Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    "Start here" is a really silly way to compare Dems and Republicans. It has nothing to do with the end goals of both parties. It has nothing to do with the final mathematics. Its a simple statement that Dems want the Republicans to eliminate the tax cuts for big oil to start off. You are being very cute by throwing the .ooo1 out there and i think you know it.l I have absolutely NO idea why you would phrase it the way you did, other than to demean dems once again.
    Really!
    If you were serious you would address President Obama's 4 trillion cut proposal and compare it to the Republicans.
    Thats a honest discussion.

    Once again, are you for or against the Dem position on this isssue?
    Last edited by Havakasha; 05-11-2011 at 03:23 PM.

  8. #8
    SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    You've gone off topic. Way off topic. Here's the headline and the first couple lines.

    "If you want $2 trillion in cut, Start here.
    Reid To Boehner: If You Want $2 Trillion In Cuts, Start With Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

    WASHINGTON -- Less than a day after House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) demanded that the debt ceiling not be lifted unless the government reduce spending by $2 trillion, Democrats are calling his bluff.

    Senate Democratic leadership is asking Boehner to reaffirm support for ending tax breaks to five of the top oil companies as part of his quest to achieve federal savings."

    Now let's review the series of events.

    1.) Boehner says he want $2 trillion in cuts to increase the debt limit
    2.) Reid says "ok jackass" if you want cuts, lets with $2.1 B per year of big oil subsidies

    You more or less confirm what I have said with this, "Its a simple statement that Dems want the Republicans to eliminate the tax cuts for big oil to start off". It is indeed party politics. You say it: the Dems want it".

    All I've said, and I've been consistent, is THAT IT IS ACTUALLY QUITE SMALL, then went on to say more than once that republicans SHOULD JUST GIVE IT TO THEM to move on to a more serious discussion.

    So please STOP with the "trying to demean dems once again."

    Yes, we can certainly debate the house republicans plan vs. Obama's plan. Go ahead and start another thread.

  9. #9
    Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    Just disagree with how you framed this. I understand the article cause i posted it.
    You chose to make a comparison between Boehners proposal and a FIRST STEP that Dems were referring to.
    You and no one else. There was zero reason to compare 2 trillion to 21 billion. None whasover. Yet you
    managed somehow. Lol

    Reid said "lets start with". Any rational person would then understand thats one part of the Dem proposal.

    Its just plain silly and once again demonstrated your predisposition to slam Dems and coddle Repubs.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 05-11-2011 at 04:08 PM.

  10. #10
    SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    Oh vay. You are unrelenting.

    I'm sending an e-mail to Boehner. It will read like this.

    Dear Representative Boner:

    Please give Representative Reid his $2.1 B per year from Big Oil subisidies so the real debate can move forward. You are both being idealogues trying to make points with your polarized constuencies. Get it done with so I can get this unrelenting NYC democrat to stop saying that I slam democrats, and we can move on to more meaningful discussions.

    Respectfully Submitted,

    S&L

  11. Ad Fairy Senior Member
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •