+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich plans increase the deficit

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich plans increase the deficit

    Republican presidential candidates say–all the time–that they hate budget deficits. A linchpin of each of their campaigns is a promise to slash government and eliminate the deficit and the national debt. So which one of them would accomplish this ambitious goal?

    According to a new analysis from the non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, none of them would. ... In fact, compared to what the fiscal watchdog calls a realistic budget baseline (that is, if the government continues on the track it’s on today) all of the GOP candidates, save for Ron Paul, would make matters worse.

    Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich would make things far, far worse. Mitt Romney’s tax and spending plan wouldn’t bend the debt curve very much one way or the other. But, according to CRFB, if he doesn’t find a way to pay for his latest plan to cut tax rates by 20 percent Romney would significantly increase deficits and the debt as well.

    Except for Paul, each of the candidates has the same problem. They have enthusiastically promised to cut taxes in very specific ways—sometimes by vast amounts. But when it comes to offsetting spending reductions or cuts in tax breaks, they mostly offer little more than platitudes.


    http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/...e-the-deficit/

    It's the same old Republican line that we've heard over and over. They (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about deficits when a Dem is in office, but the own plans are just more cut taxes and borrow.

    It's like, "we fooled them once with Reagan, we fooled them again with Bush, why not fool them again?"

    You reckon the American people are stupid enough to fall for it a third time?

    I wouldn't bet against it.

  2. Icon15

    Just in time for the election...

    Nation might reach $16.4 trillion debt limit close to Election Day
    02/23/12 - The $16.4 trillion debt ceiling could be reached just weeks after Election Day, according to a new report.
    The analysis raises the possibility that lawmakers might have to raise the nation's borrowing limit before the election, a scenario they took pains to avoid in the debt deal passed in August. Now, partially due to lower than expected tax receipts, the nation could reach the $16.4 trillion debt limit as early as late November, according to an analysis from the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) to be released Friday. Just a few weeks ago, the Center has estimated the debt-limit wouldn’t be reached until the spring of 2013.

    But continued sluggishness in the economy, coupled with the recent payroll package that adds to the deficit, is casting doubt on that timeframe, raising the possibility of a bitter fight over deficit spending at the height of a presidential election year. Last year's fight over the debt ceiling brought the nation to the brink of default and resulted in the first-ever downgrade of U.S. securities. The last-minute deal to raise the borrowing limit by $2.1 trillion was supposed to tide the government over until the end of 2012, by which point electoral politics would be in the rearview mirror.

    But analysts at the BPC said it’s looking increasingly likely that those best-laid plans will be dashed by “unexpected circumstances.” "Congress, the administration and outside analysts believed that this increase would allow federal borrowing under the limit until well into 2013," writes Steve Bell, senior director of economic policy at BPC. "Due to unexpected circumstances ... that belief appears increasingly likely to have been misguided."

    The timeline is shrinking, the BPC said, because corporations are paying significantly less in taxes than the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has estimated in August, when the debt-limit increase was approved. In its latest forecast, released in January, the CBO said that corporate tax receipts are "significantly weaker" than previously estimated, despite rising profits. CBO lowered its forecast for corporate tax expectations by $78 billion in the January report.

    MORE
    So here is my suggestion: Forget bombs -- we should drop Obama administration policy makers on Iraq and Syria. That would ensure the ruin of the Islamic State in no time!

  3. Default

    There is a phrase the conservative love to use in regards to liberals... "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury."

    The truth is that the Republicans that they support are engaging in this sort of thing right now. If you look at the Republican tax plans, they are filled with kick backs to their cronies. They only complain about the debt and deficit when they lose their turn at the public trough.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by waltky View Post
    Just in time for the election...

    Nation might reach $16.4 trillion debt limit close to Election Day
    02/23/12 - The $16.4 trillion debt ceiling could be reached just weeks after Election Day, according to a new report.
    It's outrageous!

    Vote out those who won't compromise to lower the deficit if you really care about getting something done.

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
    It's outrageous!

    Vote out those who won't compromise to lower the deficit if you really care about getting something done.
    Alternative option would be to vote out those who refuse to drastically reduce expenditure/entitlement spending, decrease the deficit before increasing taxation.

    Seems like a noble cause.
    Last edited by REDRUM; Apr 20 2012 at 06:51 AM.

  6. #6

    Default

    bump

    10char

  7. Default

    Or you could just give taxpayers the freedom to choose which government organizations they gave their own, individual hard-earned taxes to...aka pragmatarianism. How awesome would it be if 150 million of our most productive and innovative citizens had the freedom to use their taxes to support the most effective government solutions to our society's problems?

  8. Icon15

    Granny says dem politicians is coverin' their millionaire campaign donor's butts...

    Senate fails to advance Buffett rule
    16 Apr.`12 WASHINGTON – The Democratic-controlled Senate failed on Monday to reach a super-majority needed to pass a tax plan offered by President Obama to require millionaires to pay a 30% minimum effective tax rate.
    The 51-45 defeat of the "Buffett rule," named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, fell mostly along party lines. The bill needed 60 votes to move forward. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, was the only Republican to vote with Democrats, while Arkansas Democrat Mark Pryor sided with the GOP. Senate Republicans criticized the bill as an election-year ploy by the president who has been campaigning on a message that all Americans should pay their "fair share" in order to help balance the budget. "For him, it's not about jobs or the economy. It's about his idea of fairness, about imposing it on others," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

    Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., countered that wealthy Americans are currently enjoying some of the lowest tax rates in modern history. "This unfair system has turned the gap between the richest few and everyone else into a gulf," he said. The White House proposal was named for Buffett after he publicly called last year for a tax code that does not allow the wealthiest of Americans to pay a lower effective tax rate than the middle class, which is currently possible because of how tax rules apply differently to money made off of investments vs. money earned through a pay check.

    Democrats support the Buffett rule as part of a broader effort to raise taxes on the wealthy to help close the nation's budget gap. Republicans have resisted any standalone effort to raise taxes as a way to do that, arguing that it would choke off investment and job growth. The White House estimates that the proposal would affect about 450,000 taxpayers. Outside estimates say the proposal could raise $37 billion-$50 billion annually in additional revenue, a small amount when compared to the federal debt which is currently more than $15 trillion. A Gallup Poll released April 13 showed that 60% of Americans support the Buffett rule, while 37% oppose it. The strength of public support for it comes from Democrats and independents, underscoring why Obama sought a vote on the proposal as he makes the case for his re-election.

    The U.S. House will counter Democrats this week with a bill by Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., for a one-year, 20% small-business tax cut for businesses with fewer than 500 employees, which accounts for almost all businesses. It is expected to pass the House, but not the Senate. However, the two bills show competing views on tax policy and provide a preview of the debate Congress and the White House will have to have over the Bush tax cuts, which expire Dec. 31.

    Source
    So here is my suggestion: Forget bombs -- we should drop Obama administration policy makers on Iraq and Syria. That would ensure the ruin of the Islamic State in no time!

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Iriemon View Post
    Republican presidential candidates say–all the time–that they hate budget deficits. A linchpin of each of their campaigns is a promise to slash government and eliminate the deficit and the national debt. So which one of them would accomplish this ambitious goal?

    According to a new analysis from the non-partisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, none of them would. ... In fact, compared to what the fiscal watchdog calls a realistic budget baseline (that is, if the government continues on the track it’s on today) all of the GOP candidates, save for Ron Paul, would make matters worse.

    Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich would make things far, far worse. Mitt Romney’s tax and spending plan wouldn’t bend the debt curve very much one way or the other. But, according to CRFB, if he doesn’t find a way to pay for his latest plan to cut tax rates by 20 percent Romney would significantly increase deficits and the debt as well.

    Except for Paul, each of the candidates has the same problem. They have enthusiastically promised to cut taxes in very specific ways—sometimes by vast amounts. But when it comes to offsetting spending reductions or cuts in tax breaks, they mostly offer little more than platitudes.


    http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/...e-the-deficit/

    It's the same old Republican line that we've heard over and over. They (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about deficits when a Dem is in office, but the own plans are just more cut taxes and borrow.

    It's like, "we fooled them once with Reagan, we fooled them again with Bush, why not fool them again?"

    You reckon the American people are stupid enough to fall for it a third time?

    I wouldn't bet against it.
    True, but much less than Obama or the democrats, which of course means to the dems, that the republican candidates are "cutting" the budget to the bone and will throw old people out on the streets! LMAO
    Omitting the ‘doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts’ is not a morally neutral act; it is a subtle deception that calls scientific practice into disrepute.

    Climate scientists face an ethical choice: do they conform to established ethical standards of scientific practice or do they sacrifice those standards in favour of actions and statements that will be more likely to shape public opinion and climate policy in their preferred direction?

    Peter Lee

  10. Icon15

    Dem politicians gonna break us all, den there gonna be chaos in the streets - den all Helter Skelter gonna break out an' ever'body gonna be askin' ol' Charlie Manson to lead the way...

    The $5 Trillion Man: Debt Has Increased Under Obama by $5,027,761,476,484.56
    April 18, 2012 - In the 39 months since Barack Obama took the oath of office as president of the United States, the federal government’s debt has increased by $5,027,761,476,484.56.
    Although he has served less than a term, Obama is now the first American president to see the federal government's debt increase by more than $5 trillion during his time in office. During the full eight years that George W. Bush served as president, the federal government's debt increased by $4,899,100,310,608.44. (Rising from $5,727,776,738,304.64 to $10,626,877,048,913.08.)

    The $5,027,761,476,484.56 that the debt has increased during Obama's presidency equals $16,043.39 for every one of the 313,385,295 people the Census Bureau now estimates live in the United States. At the close of business on Jan. 20, 2009, the day Obama was inaugurated, the federal government’s debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08, according to the U.S. Treasury. By the close of business on April 16, 2012—as many Americans were working to finalize their 2011 tax returns to meet an April 17 filing deadline—the debt had reached $15,654,638,525,397.64.

    The $5,027,761,476,484.56 in additional debt that the U.S. government has taken on during the 39 months that Obama has been president is more debt than the federal government accumulated in the first 219 years of the Republic. The total federal debt did not exceed $5,027,761,476,484.56 until March 14, 1996, when President Bill Clinton was in the last year of his first term in office. On that day, the national debt rose from $5,025,887,531,178.79 to 5,035,165,720,616.33.

    Source
    So here is my suggestion: Forget bombs -- we should drop Obama administration policy makers on Iraq and Syria. That would ensure the ruin of the Islamic State in no time!

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Study: Gingrich, Santorum plans hike deficit
    By marbro in forum Political Opinions & Beliefs
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Sep 14 2013, 03:31 AM
  2. Obama campaign: Romney, Santorum policies would grow deficit
    By hopeless_in_2012 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Feb 21 2012, 12:18 PM
  3. Santorum 39%, Romney 27%, Gingrich 15%
    By Calminian in forum Current Events
    Replies: 162
    Last Post: Feb 18 2012, 12:43 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Jan 31 2012, 03:18 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks