Tag: Political debates about the United States federal budget

This is what donkey fiscal discipline looks like

Well, for the first time in 4 years Senate Democrats have a budget proposal, and from what I have seen they might as well have done what they did the last 4 years: nothing. This new monstrosity basically adds close to a trillion dollars in new taxes, a whole lot of money they can steer to their constituency, lobbyists, friends, and advocacy groups stimulus spending, at the same time as it seems to add close to $10 trillion in new welfare spending (see graph below).

The Senate on Wednesday presented its first budget in four years, a proposal by leaders of the Democrat-controlled chamber that calls for nearly $1 trillion in tax increases but includes no strategy to make federal revenue match spending in the coming years.

The plan calls for $975 billion in new tax revenue through closing loopholes and ending deductions and credits benefiting corporations and the country’s highest wage earners.

It also calls for $100 billion in new stimulus spending while cutting $1.85 trillion from the deficit over 10 years. The rest of the savings would come through spending cuts.

Yeah, sure! All I see is a lot of new taxation – not limited to the evil rich but hitting everyone, but especially the middle class the hardest – followed by promises of cuts so far in the future that only douchebag liberals and their friends in the LSM take that crap seriously. And of course we get stimulus spending too. The people that swallowed up the close to $1 trillion of tax payer’s money our government pissed away four years ago, with the rest of us that were not part of that elite chosen few seeing nothing of that spent money, want more, and they will get it.

I also hear that they are counting on some $600 billion in savings from the Iraq and Afghan wars, which were scheduled to end in 2014 anyway. So If I decide to spend $3000 on new furniture for my place, then decide not to, I saved $3K? That’s the logic at work for these government types. What nonsense. Especially when I see a lot of new spending in that graph that follows after we are get these savings.


First Senate Budget Proposal in 4 years sucks

In case you are unable to do basic math, that’s a fuckton of new spending. A decade from now government will be spending $2 trillion more than it does now. Add up all that new spending over that decade and we are looking at more than $10 trillion. I don’t think we have any cuts there that matter if projected spending keeps going up, and the taxes are not going to be enough to make a dent in that number. I am sure the CBO accountants will find a way to pretend things work out in the future, even if not a single bit of the pretending/projecting since 2008 has come true. Looks like, at a minimum, we will be sitting on some $27 trillion of debt by 2023 if these fuckers get their way. They are likely getting their advice from this moron, which is why they feel this is not a big deal. Back to the article.

Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray said the budget takes a balanced, “pro-middle-class” approach and argued the country’s economic problems started long before fellow Democrats entered the White House in 2009.

Pro-middle-class? Sure, I can see how you would think this crap is pro-middle-class if you also think rape is just rough sex. The group most likely to suffer the hardest under these new tax changes are the members of the middle class. Look back for the last 4 years, then look at what’s coming, and the group getting hammered the worst is the middle class. Bar none. And that’s the direct consequence. Imagine the pain as our economy throws another seizure because of all the foreseen and unforeseen consequences of the socio-engineering attempts of the nanny staters? It’s not accidental that these progressives talking the talk about helping the poor have seen the largest increase of the welfare rolls during Obama’s tenure, while the rich have gotten richer. The middle class? They have been hammered. Wait until Obamacare kicks in and the pain really starts. And yet, the left keeps pretending they care about the middle class. Insulting. Really insulting.

“Despite some of the rhetoric you may hear from my Republican colleagues, the Great Recession didn’t start the day President Obama was elected,” said Murray, D-Wash.

No, it started with the oh so many socio-engineering and other gerrymandering efforts by the left, going back decades. Obama has only prolonged the pain, probably for at least the next decade, through the policies he and the left stuck us with in the last 4 years. Trillions we don’t have spent and nothing to show for it, with the law telling us even more trillions we do not have will need to be spent. But why let facts get in the way of a pipe dream, huh? Spend us into prosperity! Never mind $1 trillion in stimulus, spend $50 trillion. Then we will be the most prosperous country evah! Don’t worry about the debt. Krugababy said so.

Anyhoo, back to the article one more time. This is something everyone needs to be aware of:

The plan also calls for replacing the recent, $85 billion in spending cuts with more measured cuts.

That’s code for ending these cuts and replacing them with the promise of cuts sometime in the far, far away future. For those that have a problem with that math it means that they want to go back to spending that money and plan to never cut anything. Banana republic here we come! We are so doomed, and the number of freeloaders has put us over the tipping point.

Seriously, the Senate should have not proposed a budget at all. It would be less ridiculous and stupid than what they did. I pine for the bad days of the Boosh spending bonanza. I am even willing to give the left the Clinton tax rates if we get government spending what it was under Clinton. When government is spending close to $6 trillion in a decade, a 62% hike, will our GDP also be up 62%? Only idiots would pretend that’s gonna happen. So government is going to own close to 1/3 of our GDP in a decade. Our kids should hate us. We have murdered their future.

Cuts? We don’t need no stinking cuts!

The shell game has begun. So is the damned narrative. If you get your news from the usual LSM outlets, you are probably thinking that the problem is all the evil republicans who want to protect their rich buddies from paying their “fair share”, whatever the fuck that bullshit arbitrary marxist lingo – and have no doubt that it is arbitrary on purpose, so they can redefine it in their favor whenever they feel they need to steal more money – is supposed to mean. The narrative is that the democrats are standing fast but working hard to get a compromise, and Politico is doing its best to carry the narrative. What’s the first issue? Them dumb republicans will have to cave to the donkeys and give us tax hikes.

Listen to top Democrats and Republicans talk on camera, and it sounds like they could not be further apart on a year-end tax-and-spending deal — a down payment on a $4 trillion grand bargain.

But behind the scenes, top officials who have been involved in the talks for many months say the contours of a deal — including the size of tax hikes and spending cuts it will most likely contain — are starting to take shape.

Cut through the fog, and here’s what to expect: Taxes will go up just shy of $1.2 trillion — the middle ground of what President Barack Obama wants and what Republicans say they could stomach.

That $ 1.2 trillion over a long period, maybe a decade or two, because there is no way they hike taxes on just the rich to get that much in a year. It’s thus going to be fucking peanuts in the grand scheme of things, because they are spending roughly the same amount every year over and above what they collect. If we say that the $ 1.2 trillion is over a decade, then doing the math, we are looking at about $12 trillion of money we don’t have over a decade, means we end up with $10.8 trillion in new debt after this new tax offsets the spending. We are fucked because these new taxes do nothing of any real consequence.

So what’s left? Well the vaunted cuts. The problem is that the donkeys, now that they have gotten their taxes, do not really want the cuts. Oh, don’t get me wrong, the LSM is going out of its way to pretend they do. Check this nonsense out:

A top Democratic official said talks have stalled on this question since Obama and congressional leaders had their friendly-looking post-election session at the White House. “Republicans want the president to own the whole offer upfront, on both the entitlement and the revenue side, and that’s not going to happen because the president is not going to negotiate with himself,” the official said. “There’s a standoff, and the staff hasn’t gotten anywhere. Rob Nabors [the White House negotiator], has been saying: ‘This is what we want on revenues on the down payment. What’s you guys’ ask on the entitlement side?’ And they keep looking back at us and saying: ‘We want you to come up with that and pitch us.’ That’s not going to happen.”

We want to cut entitlements. But by how much? Lets look at the Politico article for some perspective:

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) told “Morning Joe” on Tuesday that he could see $400 billion in entitlement cuts. That’s the floor, according to Democratic aides, and it could go higher in the final give and take. The vast majority of the savings, and perhaps all of it, will come from Medicare, through a combination of means-testing, raising the retirement age and other “efficiencies” to be named later. It is possible Social Security gets tossed into the mix, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) plans to fight that, if he has to yield on other spending fronts.

Hmm. $400 billion cut? Is that in annual spending, or is that $400 billion over a decade? Because if it is $400 billion over a decade, it is chump change. And while it will not bridge the annual gap – that $1.2 trillion of money we don’t have being spent each year – $400 billion is a lot. That’s $4 billion over a decade. The problem is that even when combined with the $1.2 trillion hike, we are looking at a total of $5.2 trillion over the decade. But then that still falls horribly short. At our current spending rate, we will have $12 trillion of added debt. While $5.2 trillion is no chump change, we still would be left with $6.8 trillion in new debt. And that’s assuming that the $400 billion number is annual, which I doubt is the case.

The problem isn’t that a total $400 billion cut is insignificant, or that even if it really is a $4 trillion cut over the decade that it isn’t enough, it is that this cut thing is a total shell game. Dig down through this puff piece and eventually you find this:

Democrats want most Medicare and other entitlement savings to kick in between 10 and 20 years from now, which will make some Republicans choke. Democrats will point to the precedent set by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) of pushing most mandatory savings off until a decade from now.

We have to wait 10 to 20 years for the cuts? Seriously? Can we just say they want NO CUTS, because if the cuts happen 10 years out, as I already showed, we will be another $10 trillion in debt (assuming the tax increases happen). And if they come 20 years later that debt figure doubles. The cuts happening so far out that we can just accept it as fiat that they would never happen, is not acceptable. It’s not even an accounting gimmick. It is a bald faced bullshit lie. And even if off topic, I want to point out that I do not recall the Ryan plan pushing the cuts out like Politico claims, but I could be wrong. Yeah CM, that your token distraction item. You can focus on this tid-bit and ignore the rest of this story.

It sure is a given that these spending cuts, if they ever happens, still fall far short of what we need. And this assumes that these marxists don’t get to do what they really want – the reason they are doing the whole Kabuki dance about taxing the rich more for – which is to use the tax hike as an excuse to increase the entitlement spending they rely on to buy votes. More debt. We have also not even factored in debt increases due to Obamacare’s costs. The taxes & penalties that this behemoth levies are significant and economy crushing, but they will never cover the cost. Anyone telling you otherwise is a god damned liar. Even more debt. So we are still looking at an enormous jump in debt over the next decade if these crooks get their way. Huge jump. At least $10 trillion, in the best case scenario. Probably more.

Look, let’s not kid ourselves. If the cuts are not immediate and significant, they are never going to happen. This plan, if it doesn’t implement immediate cuts, is a sham. The American people are being had. Well, at least those of us that are productive tax payers doing the right thing are being bent over and had. The free loaders are gonna keep their gravy train and vote accordingly. At least until the gravy train derails. We are doomed. Nobody wants to deal with reality. We have to cut back spending or we are going to end up with an economic implosion that will wipe out practically all prosperity, growth, and advancement of the last century. Shame on the crooks willfully doing this to us. We are already over the fiscal cliff, and not bright enough to admit it.