The Budget Crisis........in layman's terms.....

[Comish]

I'm generally bullish on America's future, but this is painfully scary.

 

I'm no actuary, but this is pretty plainly explained (although the narrator's dry recitation reinforces one's opinion of accountants)

 

Note that it is not partisan, just factual.

 

This 5 minute video breaks down just why we won't be able to fix our

debt problems and the end results.

 

http://www.youtube-n...5IdwltaAc?rel=0

[knapplc]

I don't believe that anything is unfixable. There are no absolutes with the economy. What needs to stop, first thing, is the political brinksmanship between the two parties. They need to stop wielding the economy as a bludgeon against each other. When either party can manipulate the economy to make it less secure or stable for their betterment, to the detriment of the country, that's a huge problem.

[Comish]

I don't believe that anything is unfixable. There are no absolutes with the economy. What needs to stop, first thing, is the political brinksmanship between the two parties. They need to stop wielding the economy as a bludgeon against each other. When either party can manipulate the economy to make it less secure or stable for their betterment, to the detriment of the country, that's a huge problem.

I don't disagree. It will be interesting to see if the public has the stomach for real change and sacrifice. And, I believe in the American people enough to predict they will. Just thought it interesting that the announcer framed his point originally as "unfixable".

[knapplc]

The problem is that if the public has the stomach for it or not isn't relevant in this election. There isn't a candidate who will do anything different than perpetuate the policies (be they conservative or liberal) that have gotten us into this mess. The "stomach for change" should have come to the fore a year ago in the Republican primary process. Instead we're left with this guy, who won't fix anything. (not saying Obama will, mind you)

[Moiraine]

It won't be fixed. People bitch over a $1 per month tax increase. That's why taxes are used so much in campaign commercials. People are stupid. No politician who wants to be re-elected will ever do anything to fix it because it will piss off their ignorant, whiney constituents. This is a major problem with democracy. What is right is not always popular. The person who does the right, unpopular thing is not going to stay in office. And fixing the economy requires a large # of politicians doing the right, unpopular thing and then actually agreeing on it.

 

No congress is going to want to be the one that cut these things and increased taxes, even if it's what needs to be done.

 

Also, politicians are not exempt from that defense mechanism of avoiding thinking about negative things. That video was scary and depressing, so I'm going back to the football forum until I forget that I ever watched it.

[Comish]

The problem is that if the public has the stomach for it or not isn't relevant in this election. There isn't a candidate who will do anything different than perpetuate the policies (be they conservative or liberal) that have gotten us into this mess. The "stomach for change" should have come to the fore a year ago in the Republican primary process. Instead we're left with this guy, who won't fix anything. (not saying Obama will, mind you)

And you don't think Romney tying himself to Ryan's plan is a bold effort (sink or swim the election) is anything different?

[Ziggy]

So what does everyone think will help our budget? Not passing one for 3 years I don't think is the answer. Doing nothing sure hasn't helped much either. Honestly the only plan I have seen put seriously forward was Paul Ryan's, which is probably why he is the VP pick. People do tend to vote with their wallets.

[lo country]

You guys are insane if you think we can ever get

A) a balanced budget or

B) out of debt

 

When we continue to spend more than we take in we are screwed. Look at your own bank account. How many on this board have ever had credit card debt they could only pay the interest on and not even touch the principle? Quite a few I would guess.

 

We are too far gone to ever get debt free. We owe TRILLIONS of dollars.

 

Even Ryans so called balanced budget still has our debt increasing by approx 3.6 trillion in 10 yrs IIRC. Folks say that his budget "cuts to much". Obama's current deficit reduction budget has it increasing approx 7 trillion in the same amount of time. Clinton had the first since 1969 passed in 1989 IIRC. Took 20 yrs, but he did it. 23 years since the last one. 23 years of increased debt.

 

With neither side willing to sacrifice its favorite programs, partisan politics getting worse there is not much hope for getting out of debt.

 

No one is ready to do without to get out of debt. This means an increase in taxes across the board to generate revenue (including those on welfare), raising interest rates to slow buying and increase the demand by lowering the supply of quick cash, decreasing spending on social programs, aggressively going after fraud, waste and abuse, defense cuts, allowing banks to quit issuing high risk loans, less govt regulation of private industry etc......

 

Watch how may folks say we can't cut A, B or C. Hell we are not even politicians, owe nothing to lobbyists or constituents and we can't even agree. The libs on this board will call BS as will the conservatives. Again we can't even agree and we are just posters on an anonymous web site.

 

One more thing, we raise the debt ceiling every time. A lot of tough talk, but it still gets raised. No party wants to be "that guy" that shuts the govt down.

 

Good luck.

[knapplc]

So what does everyone think will help our budget? Not passing one for 3 years I don't think is the answer. Doing nothing sure hasn't helped much either. Honestly the only plan I have seen put seriously forward was Paul Ryan's, which is probably why he is the VP pick. People do tend to vote with their wallets.

 

Not only is that not the answer, that should be a criminally punishable offense. Dereliction of duty in the extreme.

[lo country]

So what does everyone think will help our budget? Not passing one for 3 years I don't think is the answer. Doing nothing sure hasn't helped much either. Honestly the only plan I have seen put seriously forward was Paul Ryan's, which is probably why he is the VP pick. People do tend to vote with their wallets.

 

Not only is that not the answer, that should be a criminally punishable offense. Dereliction of duty in the extreme.

 

Agreed. Can you imagine if you were employed (ie Congress or Senate) to do a job ie pass a budget and you never did. You just completely ignore your employer (constituents) and continue to pass resolution after resolution filled with pet projects and still do not do your job. The last "real" budget passed was in 1997. The other ones were "omnibus" budgets, the last being passed in 2009. It is safe to say that we have not had a budget passed since Oct of 2008 (for Fiscal yr 2009) in the form of Omnibus or real budget. Sad.

 

Term limits. Recall by those in the party who elected you (to avoid BS recalls) would be a step in the right direction. Make it illegal for a Congressman to work for a firm or lobbyists until 10 years after their last term. Similar to .mil and .gov rules. At least this would keep "career" politicians away.

[Count 'Bility]

We're just screwed no matter what. I know it's mean, and it brings tears to my eyes when I look at my 4 and 1 year old daughter and think these things, but the figures are not even fathomable, and that's scary. That's why I'm doing what I can to enjoy life as it is now as much as I can, with my family, cuz the the gravy train is just about passed. Once it does, there's many MANY people that are gonna be in a sh#t storm. Biggest problem now a days is no one knows how to live self sufficiently. I know it's arrogant, but i know that I could if I had to. what percentage of our population could grow there own garden if they had to? It's not a good situation, but yet these thoughts started a good 10 years ago and here we are still pluggin away, but I'm quite sure one day, it's all gonna crash in.

[JJ Husker]

The problem is that if the public has the stomach for it or not isn't relevant in this election. There isn't a candidate who will do anything different than perpetuate the policies (be they conservative or liberal) that have gotten us into this mess. The "stomach for change" should have come to the fore a year ago in the Republican primary process. Instead we're left with this guy, who won't fix anything. (not saying Obama will, mind you)

But isn't Ryan's willingness to address things (and not perpetuate failed policies) like social security and medicare, the very thing he is being crucified for now? Seems to me he is at least willing to address some issues that much of the country will find the solutions for distasteful but, required for long term solvency. And why the need to attempt to make this primarily a republican caused problem? should have come to the fore in repub primary? Left with this guy who won't fix anything? And you're correct, Obama has not and probably will not fix anything. It just seems to me that of any elected officials Ryan may be one of the most willing to begin addressing some of our long term problems. I guess maybe he's just on the wrong team.

[strigori]

The problem is that if the public has the stomach for it or not isn't relevant in this election. There isn't a candidate who will do anything different than perpetuate the policies (be they conservative or liberal) that have gotten us into this mess. The "stomach for change" should have come to the fore a year ago in the Republican primary process. Instead we're left with this guy, who won't fix anything. (not saying Obama will, mind you)

But isn't Ryan's willingness to address things (and not perpetuate failed policies) like social security and medicare, the very thing he is being crucified for now? Seems to me he is at least willing to address some issues that much of the country will find the solutions for distasteful but, required for long term solvency. And why the need to attempt to make this primarily a republican caused problem? should have come to the fore in repub primary? Left with this guy who won't fix anything? And you're correct, Obama has not and probably will not fix anything. It just seems to me that of any elected officials Ryan may be one of the most willing to begin addressing some of our long term problems. I guess maybe he's just on the wrong team.

Ryan's plan fixes nothing. Eliminating taxes where most of the money is generated is not the way to do things.

 

History is where we need to look for the solutions. Clinton had a balanced budget, a surplus even. And even farther back is a good place to look also. First and foremost is a need for a massive increase on investment income, back to the 40ish percent it was 20 years ago. Just that with no other changes to tax code goes a huge distance.

 

The American people need to stop listening to what is coming out of the mouths of the wealthy, like Wall St. They have no interest in what is best for the country, only what is best for them and their investments.

 

You get a lot of talk about needing to 'tighten the belt' during tough times. Well times are tough and the super rich are only getting richer while everyone else is tightening their belts. They keep this up and in the direction they want to push things, they are going to get another version of the French Revolution.

[Hingle McCringleberry]

The problem is that if the public has the stomach for it or not isn't relevant in this election. There isn't a candidate who will do anything different than perpetuate the policies (be they conservative or liberal) that have gotten us into this mess. The "stomach for change" should have come to the fore a year ago in the Republican primary process. Instead we're left with this guy, who won't fix anything. (not saying Obama will, mind you)

But isn't Ryan's willingness to address things (and not perpetuate failed policies) like social security and medicare, the very thing he is being crucified for now? Seems to me he is at least willing to address some issues that much of the country will find the solutions for distasteful but, required for long term solvency. And why the need to attempt to make this primarily a republican caused problem? should have come to the fore in repub primary? Left with this guy who won't fix anything? And you're correct, Obama has not and probably will not fix anything. It just seems to me that of any elected officials Ryan may be one of the most willing to begin addressing some of our long term problems. I guess maybe he's just on the wrong team.

Ryan's plan fixes nothing. Eliminating taxes where most of the money is generated is not the way to do things.

 

History is where we need to look for the solutions. Clinton had a balanced budget, a surplus even. And even farther back is a good place to look also. First and foremost is a need for a massive increase on investment income, back to the 40ish percent it was 20 years ago. Just that with no other changes to tax code goes a huge distance.

 

The American people need to stop listening to what is coming out of the mouths of the wealthy, like Wall St. They have no interest in what is best for the country, only what is best for them and their investments.

 

You get a lot of talk about needing to 'tighten the belt' during tough times. Well times are tough and the super rich are only getting richer while everyone else is tightening their belts. They keep this up and in the direction they want to push things, they are going to get another version of the French Revolution.

 

 

Ryans plan changes medicare for people under 55. Things have to change, revenue side and spending side. Its once we get into Welfare/Medicare/Defense everyone gets their panties in a bind.

 

It would be nice to cap Fed Spending to 10% of GDP, unless in times of declared war.

[krill]

Ryans plan changes medicare for people under 55. Things have to change, revenue side and spending side. Its once we get into Welfare/Medicare/Defense everyone gets their panties in a bind.

 

The problem with Ryan's plan, or any other plan that allows current and near future retirees to keep their current / projected benefits, while slashing benefits in the long term is that the later group is paying for the former's benefits. Ryan's plans also front loads a massive tax cut that negates all projected savings from entitle reforms, while using completely unrealistic GDP growth figures to do any deficit reduction.

 

The Bowles-Simpson plan is a much more serious and credible approach as a baseline that embraces conservative ideas. The tax bracket is consolidated into three lower rates, but capital gains will also be taxed as ordinary income. Nearly all tax breaks and deductions are thrown out. The tax on gasoline rises slightly to fund more transportation projects. The age for retirement rises over a very long period of time to reflect that people are living longer, and payroll taxes are increased, but protections are put in place for the poorest retirees. The general outline of the plan is tough medicine all around, but unlike Ryan's plan it doesn't embrace pointless partisan ideas like privatizing Medicare, and also unlike Ryan's plan, it completely flattens the deficit in the long term.

 

I think in general the federal budget needs to be more compartmentalized like payroll taxes and the tax on gasoline, i.e. a specific tax pays for a specific program. Then the debate about lowering or raising taxes for important things like transportation and entitlement benefits becomes more tangible to people rather than looking at the entire budget as a huge slush fund that congress inefficiently expends.