Lawrence Solomon – The Bachmann approach: Stop the borrowing, pay the interest on the existing debt to avoid a default, and then prioritize spending for the balance of the budget, starting with Social Security, medical, and military expenses.
Lawrence Solomon – The Bachmann approach: Stop the borrowing, pay the interest on the existing debt to avoid a default, and then prioritize spending for the balance of the budget, starting with Social Security, medical, and military expenses.
No wonder the leftoids and liberals fear her so much.
So much common sense, so much acceptance of reality, so much acceptance of the need to act now.
Yeah Soloman’s hit it on the nail….
OBOZO’s statement just prior to storming out of the “negotiations—-“We have to put this debt matter behinds so we can get on with the needed investments.”
The obvious problem is spending…his stimulus only paid swivel servants(his main constituency)….
Taxation is the Dems/OBOZO’s priority….”redistribution”…
All great stuff on the debt ceiling never being reached, by raiding the pension plans, but you need to realize that government is a PARASITE on wealth creation not the originator.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/07/spring-rice-never-met-barack-obama.php
…Reagan never stormed petulantly out of his meetings with Hill Democrats, though they had several blunt and acrimonious. One of my favorite lines was Reagan saying to Tip O’Neill (after O’Neill had tried to get Reagan to relent on the last year of his tax cut in exchange for larger domestic spending cuts), “You can get me to crap a pineapple, but you can’t get me to crap a cactus.”
The Obama-Nation(tm) is clearly in ‘crap a cactus’ country.
But then job creation and cacti both come from Texas, while pinapples come from Hawaii, don’t they Kate?
Thus we can’t blame George Bush so it must be Ronald Reagan’s fault.
Ba Ba Ba, Bachmann 2012!!
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, C in C
1st St. Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
Taxation is the Dems/OBOZO’s priority….”redistribution”…
Guess how much ‘debt reduction’/….”redistribution”…
Obozo will put into his reelection stimulus?
I hope Bachmann’s plan includes large cuts for SS, medicare, and defense otherwise this isn’t going to work. Those three are the jet engines of mid to long-term deficit creation.
I kind of liked Bachmann until she signed that insane ‘Declaration of Dependence’. The idiots of the left sometimes get it right (busted clock etc). Turns out Bachmann really is nuts.
Last night I had a lengthy discussion with a Vancouver-based liberal on the U.S. budget crisis / debt ceiling. He came out swinging, saying that the Tea Party was to blame and completely nuts.
“Really?”, I asked, “Cause I consider myself to be a Tea Party person, if only in spirit.” Then I went on to talk about what an individual, a family, a community, and a country would eventually have to do if it was spending more – way more – than it was taking in. I think my comments, especially about the family – with his 2 young boys right in front of him – hit some chords.
The bigger question for us now is this: When will Stephen Harper & co. take the same MUCH NEEDED steps to start paying off our debts?!
Bachmann,someone who makes sense.
We (Canadians too) either do a controlled drawdown of spending or see an uncontrolled economic collapse.
Either way will upset the ricebowls of lots of people, but the pain of a controlled drawdown is manageable. I doubt the parasites who oppose a controlled drawdown will enjoy the pain caused by an uncontrolled collapse……
The Achilles heel of the Tea Party is that is does not have a policy that really solves the fundamental problem of tax and spend. The proposals, even if implemented are only good until the next election cycle.
Obviously, the body politic needs new constitutional protection from itself. How? A new tax policy that is a major driver of spending.
What no gold standard? Ron Paul spent thirty years just so he could make a fool of Bernenke for the whole world to see, and Bachmann thinks she will be credible if she passes this chance up.
The Tea Party is Americas only hope right now to avoid civil war in the future.
steve: reason is the enemy of faith.
The liberal democratic party can’t five up their spending addiction.
The Liberal republican party cannot wait to take over the spending.
Bachmann is like Joan of Arc come to save us … can she do it?
So many liberals, so little time ….
I hope and pray.
Obama is creating a financial crisis to wit he can claim he fixed so he can win the next election, Lame Stream Media is playing along with the crisis to boost his numbers.
Yes…brilliant. Cut, and sell what you don’t cut. Because underpaid and/or unemployed people like to spend their money and pay the taxes that will pay off the deficit. Oh, and businesses will reap the profit from all of the increased spending.
Idiots.
She makes FAR too much sense, so the media MUST and WILL destroy her. This will be the dirtiest presidential campaign EVER as the American left fights tooth and nail to retain their power.
How? A new tax policy that is a major driver of spending.
Good.Now take your butt down to the taxman and tell him to take ALL your income so you can spend more.Oh.And buy wheelbarrow stock.You’ll need it to carry the useless Obozo bucks.
We need to bite the Depression bullet now,
and for the future while we can still support our people on soup/food line kitchens.
When I read about those 30 million Egyptians running out of their economy and food next year,
it brings on a chill..
Next year two women run the US. One as pres. one as vice. Guess who.
robert – how could your friend blame the Tea Party? They aren’t in control of the government.
It seems to me that the Democrat and Obama focus on consumers and consumption, rather than wealth production, is the key problem. After all, if a population consumes more than it produces, well…
The Obama agenda is to set up a two-tiered society; the Rulers and the Ruled. The ruled will function only as consumers, using money distributed by the government and/or, using money from their own work (primarily public service work), and/or using money from businesses….BUT NOTE: Businesses will NOT be allowed to keep control of their profits; they must hand it over to the govt, who will ‘distribute’ it to consumers.
Result? A nation that has no capacity to INVEST because the govt takes all profits. Without investment in research, creating new technology, building more plants, investing in businesses…wealth production STOPS DEAD.
This is the Obama economics. He focuses only on consumers..and he increases the ratio of the population who are dependent on govt funding: he increases the unionized public service, and he increases the poor, marginal..and also, those who pay no taxes but receive all kinds of govt benefits. This is his electoral base.
This is what the debt crisis is all about; it’s a crisis because the GOP want to reduce the COST of govt, and reduce the proportion of consumers to producers…and increase the size of the latter. They do this by allowing producers to keep their money..to invest.
But Obama, who cannot campaign on the results of his three years in office because his policies are disastrous..wants to campaign by buying the electorate. To do this, he needs not only to maintain the ‘welfare state’ but he needs to INCREASE the ratio of dependents and reduce the power of the producers.
So, he wants to tax the ‘wealthy’ …which he calls anyone who makes over 200,000 a year. These are primarily small businesses…and Obama will take away their capacity to invest and to hire.
That’s why Obama is so adamant, so near hysteria; he needs to maintain buying his electoral base and increasing its size…because he can’t campaign on his policies. It’s all about Him.
ET, good question. My friend, who voted Green last election but usually votes Liberal federally, stated that the Tea Party:
1. Doesn’t want taxes raised (true)
2. Wants spending cut (true)
3. Doesn’t want any tax loopholes removed (???)
4. Basically wants the status quo + less spending
I think that #3 and the first part of #4 are more his projections.
Davers6 hit the nail on the head above: “She makes FAR too much sense, so the media MUST and WILL destroy her. This will be the dirtiest presidential campaign EVER as the American Left fights tooth and nail to retain their power.”
And because of that, Bachmann can’t possibly win because of her husband’s private company which focuses on changing the inclinations of gay men. Maybe in some cases this is possible but in most, I don’t think so. In any case, once this factoid is brought front & centre, her campaign will effectively be over.
P.S. Further to Marcus Bachmann, this is worth a read. Even if there’s no truth to what I said above (which was the way it was described to me), you & I both know how the Media Party will spin it. Much like the Human Wrongs Commissions here in Canuckistan, facts don’t matter to the MSM Cabal whose prime directive is to protect El Messiah.
Iberia:
Because underpaid and/or unemployed people like to spend their money and pay the taxes that will pay off the deficit
Perhaps you’re unaware (I could just stop there, come to think of it) that the bottom 50% of US taxpayers only pay 3.6% of the total income tax paid in the US. The top 5% pay over half of all income tax, while making only 30% of total income. The top 50% of income earners pay virtually all taxes. It’s not the “underpaid and unemployed” who are carrying the tax burden.
And you call other people “idiots”. Look in the mirror.
No, you’re still the idiot here, kevinb, because you’re ignoring the other half of the equation…consumerism. Even that arch unionist Henry Ford knew that he had to pay his workers well if he wanted to sell lots of cars.
Perhaps you can check your fact book to see how much of the consumer economy is based on the top 5%. Lower and middle income people spend most of their money locally, they don’t buy villas in the Grand Caymans.
lberia – I don’t understand how underpaid and unemployed people pay taxes. Since at least 50% of the US population pay no income taxes, then, this set would be in that definition.
The focus isn’t on these people who consume, pay no taxes and receive govt benefits. The focus is on the wealth-producers. Don’t get your knickers in a twist over the terminology; it doesn’t mean lottery winnings; it means any private business what makes a profit. That’s wealth production.
Now, a robust healthy economy ought to leave that profit in the hands of the private individuals. No, they won’t hide it in a sock; they’ll INVEST it to hire more people, or purchase new equipment. This production-of-wealth is the basic infrastructure of a robust economy.
Socialism and Obama are destroying this; they want any and all private wealth produced by these small businesses. What will Obama do with this money? He’ll hand it over to the Consumers..the underemployed and unemployed and the public service unionites (and remember, the public service is not a wealth producer). Result? It will all be consumed. No new jobs set up, no new factories, no new equipment purchases. Heh..a recession economy.
Robert W – yes, I think you are right, but I think that Michele Bachmann’s campaign was a ‘blip in the road’ and wouldn’t have lasted anyway. The Obama Gang will, of course, exploit this to the hilt – but, in a way, it will divert their attention from the other candidates. And the Obama Gang are going to play vicious and malicious during this campaign.
Remember, Obama has nothing to run on; no record of accomplishments. He had none in 2008 either – no record of accomplishments. Obama has no identity. No ‘self’, no principles that you can focus on to describe him. He’s a blank slate who reflects whatever audience wishes he’s talking with – because his agenda is only to enslave them, manipulate them..to be His.
So this time since he can’t run on his accomplishments, he’ll do the same; manipulate the electorate. Last time it was ‘not Bush’ and hope and change. This time, it will be “I’ll preserve your public cheques from the govt…and he’s going to try to increase the ratio of dependents…This time, it won’t be Hope. But Fear.
Too bad we won’t have something like that up here.
Cut ALL federal spending by 10%, in ALL departments, in ALL budgets.
The problem is that everyone has a pet project they want exempted from cuts.
Cut everything equally INCLUDING all salaries for members of the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branches.
Equal cuts are the only fair way to do it.
Somebody doesn’t understand economics. And that person is Iberia.
The US is in trouble largely because their economy is based on consumption fueled by debt. That has to change and these cuts are part of the change.
Only candidate I have given money to, so far. The left will try to destroy her.
The US gov needs to end subsidies, in particular, those for ethanol production, and agricultural production
Jesus ET, Obama is sounding more like a personification of “the one” from The Lord of The Rings everyday.
Who will step forward as our Frodo?
Robert W. that is the first time I’ve heard anything much about her husband; I’m betting I’m not alone. Of course many will try to judge her by her husband’s attempts at “change”. Was it fair that Ronny Reagan may have been judged over Nancy’s “Just say no” campaign? “Gayness”, seems to be a growing condition; I don’t know why or whether there is a sociological reason for it or not. Or whether one should try to change their bent or not, but I see no reason for not voting for her on just that point. Of course others, especially Dems and their fellow travelers will work to make it seem somehow evil.
ET:
Are you implying that there are no consumption (sales) taxes in the US? Because that’s part of the equation. If low and middle income people have more money, they buy more widgets, pay more in sales taxes and help the widget company make more money. In a perfect world it would take the profit from this money and reinvest it in their company. Unfortunately, nowadays they are more likely to invest in moving the company off shore where they can make a greater prfit.
And while some liberatarians might be smarter, you obviously have a way to go since you don’t know the difference between consumer debt and government debt.
Everybody knows the difference between consumer debt and government debt.
Consumer debt you either payoff, go bankrupt or die to remove it.
Government debt never gets removed. You hand it over to your unborn grandchildren and their children. They get to pay for your extravagance.
Isn’t government debt the only way to go?
lberia – I’m not talking about debt – consumer or government. I’m talking about an economy’s ability to produce wealth – which it will then INVEST in infrastructure to generate more wealth. you seem to ignore this basic component of economics.
Infrastructure investment is: building or expanding a factory, purchasing more equipment, hiring more workers. Investing it in loans to small businesses. That’s investment.
You don’t seem to understand this basic role of an economy: producing wealth (wealth is understood as profit). And your leftist naivete rejects profit.
Heh. That’s like living in a hunting and gathering society – where you don’t grow anything, just eat ‘what’s there’. But in profit-oriented societies, which are the only type that can sustain a large population – you HAVE to produce MORE than you consume. Then, you INVEST this ‘profit’. in seeds for next year’s crop, or in building a factory, or in building roads, homes, hiring more workers. Ever think of that? Hmmm?
And moving a company offshore was due to the high corporate taxes and to the union parasites that rendered US industrialism impossible. Unionization made the costs of the workers untenable. Now, with the private industries offshore, the parastic unions have moved into the public sector – rendering the costs of public service equally untenable. The public service workers receive salaries, benefits and pensions unknown in the private sector – and, produce no wealth. And they cost the taxpayer most of the govt budget.
Again, what you fail to understand is that a robust economy must leave profit in the hands of the PRIVATE sector – which will then invest these profits back into the economy.
Sales taxes, which go to the govt, won’t help the private sector. And the minimal amount of sales taxes that the underemployed and unemployed pay – is a nanodrop in the govt bucket.
Try economics 101 and drop the naive romantic leftism of ‘evil profits’ and ‘greedy bosses’ and ‘hapless, helpless downtrodden workers’. Grow up.
Once again, Iberia’s ignorance is astonishing. We are talking about a plan to reduce the US federal debt, and he brings up sales taxes. The US has no federal sales tax, so regardless of what people spend or do not spend, that spending will have zero impact on the federal deficit. (To be fair, the US does have excise taxes on some goods, but they are the smallest source of revenue for the Feds, at less than 3%.)
Cutting spending is the only way to bring the deficit back under control. And asset sales are exactly the answer to too much debt. If any of us were drowning in debt, and we owned a vacation home or a second car, of course we would sell it to pay down the debt. That has the added benefit of reducing future interest payments, which makes up nearly 10% of federal spending right now. And since foreigners now own about half of all federal debt, that’s a huge amount of money flowing out of the country every year.
What’s the first thing any debt consultant tells consumers who are in over their heads? Reduce discretionary spending, and pay off debt. Apparently, this simple principle is too sophisticated for Iberia to figure out.
This character Iberia.
Iberia is going down because of people like him.
One wonders, don’t these people see how socialism/fascism is killing the countries of Europe bit by little bit, one by one going down the socialist/fascist Chimera.
It is just mind boggling how the people like Iberia can’t comprehend the most basic of economics.
In communist run schools they taught that it is the surplus between investment and profit that can be distributed as pay to workers. No surplus, no pay.
Interestingly enough, the socialism went out of business because the communists did not listen to themselves, they could not betray their ideology.
Iberia: “Henry Ford knew that he had to pay his workers well if he wanted to sell lots of cars”
Henry Ford could only pay his workers well if they produced a lot of cars.
Real wages rise in proportion to capital investment per worker.
Larben, I only learned of the factoid a few days ago. And while I think such efforts are probably fruitless, if they’re done from a perspective of love & compassion then I wouldn’t fault the man.
But you can already write the script that the Media Party will use against Michele Bachmann? Some sample questions:
– Why does your husband hate gays?
– Do you view homosexuals as 2nd class citizens?
– Do your husbands views on gays also extend to Blacks and other minorities?
– Etc., etc.
Remember that for all intents & purposes, the U.S. Media Party is working on behalf of Barack Obama; not too different from how CBC News has worked on behalf of the Liberals all of these decades.
Those reports about Bachmann’s husband better be false. She has enough SoCon crazy as it is without her husband pretending to be able to ‘cure’ gays.
a robust economy must leave profit in the hands of the PRIVATE sector – which will then invest these profits back into the economy.
Posted by: ET
__________________
Exactly. And when the private sector has no confidence in the economic outlook, it won’t invest, and the recession/depression will continue and deepen. If the measures outlined in this article took place, there would be a huge surge of confidence by the investors, the consumers, the workers, everyone would realize that recovery was at hand. The economy would take off like a rocket providing lots of jobs in the private sector for all those laid off government workers that Iberia is so concerned about.
Liber – And what have you got against social conservatism, and would he not be making people much happier were he to succeed? It is not like he is forcing people to take his cures.
Putting a social conservative of her stripe up for President is a guaranteed recipe for Obama’s re-election.
The independents will decide the 2012 election. Not the evangelicals, not the Tea Party, not the hard left. And independents run from candidates who front an anti-abortion, anti-gay agenda. Period.
Reagnomics – i.e., the “trickle-down” experiment is partly to blame for the current plight of the American economy. Money, unlike water tends to flow uphill. The current economic disparity in the US seems to prove this theory.
Obama seems convinced that government is “too big to fail”. Sadly we are approaching the point that the parasites (Government & FIRE – aka Finance, Insurance and real estate)by consuming virtually half of the GDP have weakened the host to the point of expiration.
The US gov needs to end subsidies, in particular, those for ethanol production, and agricultural production
From which Bachmann and her gay husband are huge beneficiaries.