Charlie Rangel and Maria Bartiromo

[flyboy56]

Maria Bartiromo of CNBC interviews Charlie Rangel, a Democratic Representative concerning his position on the fiscal cliff. His plan is to raise revenue first and than look at spending cuts. After he left the show, Maria Bartiromo looks at her partner and ask if they are on SNL! That said it all.

[CajunRaven]

Well, if you listened to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi yesterday, we've already cut $1.5T.
They want o first take credit for that before discussing further cuts.

[flyboy56]

Raising revenue before looking at what fat can be cut is like putting the cart before the horse. Democrats have been buying votes with this fat and are now afraid they will lose their support if they cut it out.

[dsummoner]

Ineptocracy:

"A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers."

Just wait for the 'but we will discuss cuts next year" smoke being blown out of the arse of the socialists if they have not already started.

Byngo!

The illegitimacy of bait and switch socialist government is so easily predicted. Rangel and his socialist ilk can take their 'plan' and choke on it.

[CajunRaven]

Raising revenue before looking at what fat can be cut is like putting the cart before the horse. Democrats have been buying votes with this fat and are now afraid they will lose their support if they cut it out.

The democrats rolled Reagan and Bush 1 on raise now, cut later. Why is this time any different?

[BiggSeth]

The democrats rolled Reagan and Bush 1 on raise now, cut later. Why is this time any different?

bohener is doing all the negotiating himself. before long, obama wil lget trillions in new taxes and no spending cuts and the dems won't have said a thing....

[BlandFood]

Screw it, lets go over the cliff, no free entitlements. Imagine all the dregs killing each other over that last rock or french fry. Winters here, so freeze baby freeze!

When you're broke you DON'T SPEND!

[flyboy56]

The democrats rolled Reagan and Bush 1 on raise now, cut later. Why is this time any different?

We are part of the new Tea Party Organization that started this debt debate back in 2009 which helped remove the incumbent liberal/moderate conservatives in 2010. We are the true conservative Republicans who believes in small government and fiscal responsibility. Call us a bunch of old white racist if you think that will marginalize us, but we are here to stay.

[CajunRaven]

We are part of the new Tea Party Organization that started this debt debate back in 2009 which helped remove the incumbent liberal/moderate conservatives in 2010. We are the true conservative Republicans who believes in small government and fiscal responsibility. Call us a bunch of old white racist if you think that will marginalize us, but we are here to stay.

Yeah, but we don't have the numbers. The election showed that. The crash is the only thing that will stop this. And then we'll have rioting when the "stuff" isn't there.

[flyboy56]

Yeah, but we don't have the numbers. The election showed that. The crash is the only thing that will stop this. And then we'll have rioting when the "stuff" isn't there.

It's not so much the numbers we need right now Cajun. But already whether anyone really wants to admit it or not, it is the Tea Party movement that has pushed the priority of debt awareness to the top of the media focus and now pressuring our representatives to start the negotiating process and that is a good thing. People are starting to realize we need to downsize our government and cut way back on spending if we are to continue being the economic powerhouse the world needs us to be.

[flyboy56]

Yeah, but we don't have the numbers. The election showed that. The crash is the only thing that will stop this. And then we'll have rioting when the "stuff" isn't there.

And don't worry about the rioting either. Our National Guard are hardened Iraqi/Afghanistan vets. I'm sure they will be able to handle it.

[CajunRaven]

It's not so much the numbers we need right now Cajun. But already whether anyone really wants to admit it or not, it is the Tea Party movement that has pushed the priority of debt awareness to the top of the media focus and now pressuring our representatives to start the negotiating process and that is a good thing. People are starting to realize we need to downsize our government and cut way back on spending if we are to continue being the economic powerhouse the world needs us to be.

I'd say people realize we have a deficit, but cuting back on spending, my bet is they're thinkng revenue. I'm afraid I'm an entrenched skeptic these days. I don't see the democrats negotiating. Not when Harry and Nancy are crowing about how they've already cut spending. The people that elected will not stand for cutting way back on spending. Once they get the so called rich, they'll be coming for us.

[flyboy56]

I'd say people realize we have a deficit, but cuting back on spending, my bet is they're thinkng revenue. I'm afraid I'm an entrenched skeptic these days. I don't see the democrats negotiating. Not when Harry and Nancy are crowing about how they've already cut spending. The people that elected will not stand for cutting way back on spending. Once they get the so called rich, they'll be coming for us.

We will be forced to cut way back if we do not want our credit rating down graded again. Risky credit applicants pay higher interest rates. For now it's all politics. We may skip along with few hiccups, but give it 3 to 5 five years from now, and spending like there is no tomorrow, the crap will hit the fan. And when that happens, when all the revenues have dried up, we will be another Russia in 1989 but worse because the world depends on our economic success.

[soulflower]

Well, if you listened to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi yesterday, we've already cut $1.5T.
They want o first take credit for that before discussing further cuts.

The 1.2 trillion in cuts begins on January 2nd if no deal to kick the can further down the road is reached:

Sequestration is a budgetary measure that will automatically cut $1.2 trillion over 10 years—nearly half of which comes from defense accounts—beginning on January 2 if Congress and the Administration do not agree on a plan to stop them.

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/26/...sequestration/

[flyboy56]

The 1.2 trillion in cuts begins on January 2nd if no deal to kick the can further down the road is reached:

Sequestration is a budgetary measure that will automatically cut $1.2 trillion over 10 years—nearly half of which comes from defense accounts—beginning on January 2 if Congress and the Administration do not agree on a plan to stop them.

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/10/26/...sequestration/

1.2T over tens years. National debt is 16T. Does anyone really see any real solutions to this problem? Baby boomers retiring at 10,000 a day collecting SSN and getting Medicare. And of course as they get older their medical bills will escalate. People, we are heading into the **** stew fast.

[soulflower]

1.2T over tens years. National debt is 16T. Does anyone really see any real solutions to this problem? Baby boomers retiring at 10,000 a day collecting SSN and getting Medicare. And of course as they get older their medical bills will escalate. People, we are heading into the **** stew fast.

The solutions won't be agreed upon during the lameduck session.

Republicans need to take what they can get now and come up with a strategy for the next congressional session...

[flyboy56]

I'd say people realize we have a deficit, but cuting back on spending, my bet is they're thinkng revenue. I'm afraid I'm an entrenched skeptic these days. I don't see the democrats negotiating. Not when Harry and Nancy are crowing about how they've already cut spending. The people that elected will not stand for cutting way back on spending. Once they get the so called rich, they'll be coming for us.

If you do the numbers, just taxing the rich and closing loop holes won't get the revenue they need. Yes, the middle class will be expected to pay more. It's the only way to the revenue needed even after they find the fat and cut it out. Remember, 16T dollars. The fiscal cliff is going to cut spending at 1.2T over ten years. Whoop dee doo...

[flyboy56]

The solutions won't be agreed upon during the lameduck session.

Republicans need to take what they can get now and come up with a strategy for the next congressional session...

I say take no deal and go over the cliff. Any quick deal now will prove to be more detrimental down the road. It'l hurt but it's a good start to true fiscal recovery IMHO.

[soulflower]

If you do the numbers, just taxing the rich and closing loop holes won't get the revenue they need. Yes, the middle class will be expected to pay more. It's the only way to the revenue needed even after they find the fat and cut it out. Remember, 16T dollars. The fiscal cliff is going to cut spending at 1.2T over ten years. Whoop dee doo...

Between the sequestration cuts and the automatic tax increases, we're looking at 1.8 to 2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next ten years. That's a pretty good start. I don't know if the economy can handle anything deeper than that. We can't cut our way of this mess. The only way to get out of this mess is to grow the economy...

[flyboy56]

Between the sequestration cuts and the automatic tax increases, we're looking at 1.8 to 2 trillion in deficit reduction over the next ten years. That's a pretty good start. I don't know if the economy can handle anything deeper than that. We can't cut our way of this mess. The only way to get out of this mess is to grow the economy...

If the savings are but towards the debt soulflower. I would believe they were serious if they enacted a balanced budget amendment and stuck with it. In 1197 they tried a Balanced Budget Act and by 1999-2000 they had already started reneging on some of the cuts.