President Obamas Speech

[ginger]

I don't pretend to be the brightest of the bunch and, it's not just this president. It's never, "hey can I borrow a cup of sugar". It's always, " I need THIS MUCH RIGHT NOW OR ELSE!- or else I'm losing the house,the car,the kid." You want me to cosign another loan when you've already screwed up everyone elses credit. Why?, so YOU can keep stylin'? You raised the debt ceiling 7 times! The president wants more from rich people (I'm not even close) doesn't matter, it's NEVER enough. Then, to top it off, if I might be so bold, you show the hard working americans no respect. You give away golf carts and free wifi on my dime and you have no money saved for a rainy day. Finally, I have $40.00 left in my wallet, which normally I would feel sorry for you and say"this is all I have but you're welcome to it" I'm not doing that anymore either. STOP CALLING ME AND STOP CALLING MY RICH RELATIVES-we're done.

[Guest Guest]

He is very good at scaring the sheep. Anyone who can think for themself knows that there is no way we aren't going to pay on our debt. obama doesn't have an intelligent response to the issue so he can only scare people and threaten others. I especially like how he started out his one speech saying he wasn't there to lay blame or point fingers at anybody and then spent the next half hour doing just that. What an incompetent boob.

[PeteMoss]

Even his mother abandoned him and wanted nothing to do with him. He has some real issues. We are ending up paying the price for his problems.

[ginger]

It's not just President Obama. I remember President Bush and Dick Cheney standing in front of the podium right after they got elected saying...well you know, the economy is right about to tank.

[Guest Guest]

How are we going to pay our debt without raising taxes? I understand that we need to make cuts, but that's not going to get the money paid back. Like it or not, we are going to have to pay more.

[Guest Guest]

How are we going to pay our debt without raising taxes? I understand that we need to make cuts, but that's not going to get the money paid back. Like it or not, we are going to have to pay more.

Do you have proof to back up your opinion?

[Guest Guest]

I remember when a president's speech was a big deal-now its every other day, or so, all in his quest to be re-elected. This guys "budget" was voted down 97-0 just a few months ago-and now he is serious about the debt that he just tried to increase by 4 trillion? Harry Reid hasn't given us a budget inover 800 days and now we have his "plan" to reduce the deficit including "savings" from the wars winding down. How is any of this serious stuff?

[Guest Guest]

I remember when a president's speech was a big deal-now its every other day, or so, all in his quest to be re-elected. This guys "budget" was voted down 97-0 just a few months ago-and now he is serious about the debt that he just tried to increase by 4 trillion? Harry Reid hasn't given us a budget inover 800 days and now we have his "plan" to reduce the deficit including "savings" from the wars winding down. How is any of this serious stuff?

Republicans counted the same savings as part of Rep. Paul Ryan's budget that was approved by the House earlier this year. Was that serious stuff when Ryan did it?

[ginger]

How are we going to pay our debt without raising taxes? I understand that we need to make cuts, but that's not going to get the money paid back. Like it or not, we are going to have to pay more.

Why do we have to pay our debt? What do you think will happen if we don't pay it? Will the president get his legs broken? Will China declare war? WOW-maybe someone will forgive us our debt for once.

[Guest Guest]

Do you have proof to back up your opinion?

 

maybe this will help you out

http://www.teachkidshow.com/teach-your-child-to-balance-a-checkbook/

[Logical Attacks]

I don't pretend to be the brightest of the bunch and, it's not just this president. It's never, "hey can I borrow a cup of sugar". It's always, " I need THIS MUCH RIGHT NOW OR ELSE!- or else I'm losing the house,the car,the kid." You want me to cosign another loan when you've already screwed up everyone elses credit. Why?, so YOU can keep stylin'? You raised the debt ceiling 7 times! The president wants more from rich people (I'm not even close) doesn't matter, it's NEVER enough. Then, to top it off, if I might be so bold, you show the hard working americans no respect. You give away golf carts and free wifi on my dime and you have no money saved for a rainy day. Finally, I have $40.00 left in my wallet, which normally I would feel sorry for you and say"this is all I have but you're welcome to it" I'm not doing that anymore either. STOP CALLING ME AND STOP CALLING MY RICH RELATIVES-we're done.

 

The Debt Ceiling has been raised 74 times since 1962, twice under Obama (7 times under Bush, but who's keeping count). The President want's to let the Bush tax cuts expire to the same levels that they were under Clinton, which historically is the third lowest they have been since the early part of last century. So yes, I am for taxing at those levels instead of balancing this solely with cuts to medicare and social security, something you and your employer has been paying for years.

[Logical Attacks]

Why do we have to pay our debt? What do you think will happen if we don't pay it? Will the president get his legs broken? Will China declare war? WOW-maybe someone will forgive us our debt for once.

 

Why do we have to pay our debt? You're against taxing the rich another 4% but you're asking why we have to pay our debt?

 

First off examine who a majority of that debt is owed to, it's owed to the social security fund. Meaning if it's not paid, social security doesn't have the funds that it's supposed to.

 

Second, are you really suggesting that we don't pay our debts to banks and foreign lenders, which means we'll default on our loans, causing our ability to borrow to be destroyed, causing our interest rates to rise (that means consumer interest rates also). I suppose you're one of those people who thinks it's perfectly okay to walk away from a mortgage eh?

[Guest Guest]

The Debt Ceiling has been raised 74 times since 1962, twice under Obama (7 times under Bush, but who's keeping count). The President want's to let the Bush tax cuts expire to the same levels that they were under Clinton, which historically is the third lowest they have been since the early part of last century. So yes, I am for taxing at those levels instead of balancing this solely with cuts to medicare and social security, something you and your employer has been paying for years.

And the debt ceiling was raised 18 times under Reagan. But who's counting.

[Facts Are Better]

Here is a sample of the rising debt ceiling....

 

June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote “yea”, Kyl votes “nay.”

 

May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.

 

November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.

 

March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.

 

September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.

 

Now the republicans are saying raising the debt ceiling is bad unless there are compromises??? There has never been any additions or compromises to the debt ceiling votes... why now? Oh yeah, that's right... they don't like this president for whatever reason they make up to cover their true thoughts.

[Logical Attacks]

Here is a sample of the rising debt ceiling....

 

June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote “yea”, Kyl votes “nay.”

 

May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.

 

November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.

 

March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.

 

September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.

 

Now the republicans are saying raising the debt ceiling is bad unless there are compromises??? There has never been any additions or compromises to the debt ceiling votes... why now? Oh yeah, that's right... they don't like this president for whatever reason they make up to cover their true thoughts.

 

 

I like their idea of compromise, so far Democrats have agreed to cut spending to Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and a few other programs typically deemed in the Democrat "wheelhouse" so to speak. Yet when they say "You can't solely balance the budget by cuts, it's impossible without completely removing every social safety net we have, you need to increase revenue also." they're suddenly anti-American and not compromising. It's confusing how programs that benefit the vast majority of the American people can be cut, but letting a 4% tax break to a small group of Americans is "anti-American". A tax break that was SUPPOSED TO EXPIRE, which was written and AGREED to let expire in 2010.

[Guest Guest]

maybe this will help you out

http://www.teachkidshow.com/teach-your-child-to-balance-a-checkbook/

 

You are making the usual stupid assumption that increasing taxes leads to more revenue. It doesn't when the increase in taxes further smothers the job creators. Get your head out.

[Guest Guest]

The Debt Ceiling has been raised 74 times since 1962, twice under Obama (7 times under Bush, but who's keeping count). The President want's to let the Bush tax cuts expire to the same levels that they were under Clinton, which historically is the third lowest they have been since the early part of last century. So yes, I am for taxing at those levels instead of balancing this solely with cuts to medicare and social security, something you and your employer has been paying for years.

 

 

I have been paying into it for decades and want them to cut it NOW so it still exists in the future.

[Guest Guest]

Why do we have to pay our debt? You're against taxing the rich another 4% but you're asking why we have to pay our debt?

 

First off examine who a majority of that debt is owed to, it's owed to the social security fund. Meaning if it's not paid, social security doesn't have the funds that it's supposed to.

 

Second, are you really suggesting that we don't pay our debts to banks and foreign lenders, which means we'll default on our loans, causing our ability to borrow to be destroyed, causing our interest rates to rise (that means consumer interest rates also). I suppose you're one of those people who thinks it's perfectly okay to walk away from a mortgage eh?

 

 

Not surprised that you are one of the sheep who falls for obama's scare tactics and theatrics. There is enough money coming in to pay on the debt, ss, medicaid and midicare, the military, and plenty of other programs.

[Logical Attacks]

I have been paying into it for decades and want them to cut it NOW so it still exists in the future.

 

If they didn't make any changes to it, the trust fund set aside for it by surplus tax revenue would last until 2037 before it went red and exhausted it's trust fund (a fund paid by the previous generation in the form of taxation). By making a few changes to it (increasing the age slightly, small cuts to the richest receiving social security, minor .5% tax rate increase, things of that nature) they can project it out past 2050 without it going red.

 

I agree, minor changes need to be changed, but the idea that balancing the budget by cutting Social Security is pants on the head dumb. You're taking a program that is IN THE BLACK, it's taking in more revenue then it costs to run it (most years at least, the last couple due to a tax break it has not, but the trust fund would cover that) and saying that we need to make cuts in it, because if we don't 26 years in the future we'll start to have problems.

 

That's silly, that's robbing from Peter to pay Paul, something that they've been doing for far to long. The people who need that, who've paid into it for a good part of their life, should have it. If they were going to say "We're removing social security, but you'll no longer be taxed" then you could sort of make an argument, but what they're saying is "We'll still tax you and your employer at 12% or so total, but we want you to give up money that you should be getting for this taxation".

[Guest Guest]

maybe this will help you out

http://www.teachkidshow.com/teach-your-child-to-balance-a-checkbook/

That is not an answer. That is an answer from someone with a child-like thought process.

[Logical Attacks]

Not surprised that you are one of the sheep who falls for obama's scare tactics and theatrics. There is enough money coming in to pay on the debt, ss, medicaid and midicare, the military, and plenty of other programs.

 

Oh please point me to these mythical funds because there isn't. Look at revenue, then take just the expenditures on Military (not just the stated budget but also the discretionary funds), SS and Medicare/Medicaid. Because there isn't even enough funds coming in to pay that.

[Guest Guest]

Here is a sample of the rising debt ceiling....

 

June 2002: Congress approves a $450 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $6.4 trillion. McConnell, Boehner, and Cantor vote “yea”, Kyl votes “nay.”

 

May 2003: Congress approves a $900 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $7.384 trillion. All four approve.

 

November 2004: Congress approves an $800 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.1 trillion. All four approve.

 

March 2006: Congress approves a $781 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $8.965 trillion. All four approve.

 

September 2007: Congress approves an $850 billion increase, raising the debt limit to $9.815 trillion. All four approve.

 

Now the republicans are saying raising the debt ceiling is bad unless there are compromises??? There has never been any additions or compromises to the debt ceiling votes... why now? Oh yeah, that's right... they don't like this president for whatever reason they make up to cover their true thoughts.

The Republicans and Congress waited too long to be forceful about a balanced budget. You conveniently left out the fact that on Mar. 2006 Obama voted NO on raising the debt ceiling. Nice try to selectively pick your facts but you really need to be honest.

[Guest Guest]

Oh please point me to these mythical funds because there isn't. Look at revenue, then take just the expenditures on Military (not just the stated budget but also the discretionary funds), SS and Medicare/Medicaid. Because there isn't even enough funds coming in to pay that.

You lumped together Medicare and Medicaid but they are 2 separate items. Workers and their employers PAID INTO Medicare. Medicaid is funded from tax receipts. You need to be honest. When are you going to start?

[Logical Attacks]

You lumped together Medicare and Medicaid but they are 2 separate items. Workers and their employers PAID INTO Medicare. Medicaid is funded from tax receipts. You need to be honest. When are you going to start?

 

Wait so I respond to a post that states "Not surprised that you are one of the sheep who falls for obama's scare tactics and theatrics. There is enough money coming in to pay on the debt, ss, medicaid and midicare, the military, and plenty of other programs."

 

Which if you noticed he included "midicare" in and I'm being dishonest? I was pointing out the absurd notion that we have enough revenue to cover these programs. We don't.

[Guest Guest]

If they didn't make any changes to it, the trust fund set aside for it by surplus tax revenue would last until 2037 before it went red and exhausted it's trust fund (a fund paid by the previous generation in the form of taxation). By making a few changes to it (increasing the age slightly, small cuts to the richest receiving social security, minor .5% tax rate increase, things of that nature) they can project it out past 2050 without it going red.

 

I agree, minor changes need to be changed, but the idea that balancing the budget by cutting Social Security is pants on the head dumb. You're taking a program that is IN THE BLACK, it's taking in more revenue then it costs to run it (most years at least, the last couple due to a tax break it has not, but the trust fund would cover that) and saying that we need to make cuts in it, because if we don't 26 years in the future we'll start to have problems.

 

That's silly, that's robbing from Peter to pay Paul, something that they've been doing for far to long. The people who need that, who've paid into it for a good part of their life, should have it. If they were going to say "We're removing social security, but you'll no longer be taxed" then you could sort of make an argument, but what they're saying is "We'll still tax you and your employer at 12% or so total, but we want you to give up money that you should be getting for this taxation".

 

 

Nobody said balance the budget by cutting ss. The thought that we could balance the budget by cutting one program is pretty ignorant. Take those pants off your head. The prognosis for ss is worse than you state and will get even worse with more and more people going on it for the next 2 decades. Add to that the fact that people are having significantly fewer children do to the financial crisis. Cuts need to be made to ALL social programs. Americans have gotten to used to fat handouts.

 

As far as "robbing peter to pay paul", what do you think they have been doing? And they only get worse unless we put the brakes on now instead of kicking the problem down the road. Like until after the next election!!! How transparent are obama and geitner?