HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » George F Will argues for ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:11 PM

George F Will argues for a balanced budget Amendment...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-f-will-time-for-a-balanced-budget-amendment/2013/01/09/6ecf85ec-59d5-11e2-9fa9-5fbdc9530eb9_story.html

<snip>
Democrats not allergic to arithmetic must know the cost of their “fiscal cliff” victory. When they flinched from allowing all of George W. Bush’s tax rates, especially those on middle-class incomes, to expire, liberalism lost its nerve and began what will be a long slide into ludicrousness.

Those temporary rates were enacted in 2001, when only 28 House Democrats supported them, and in 2003, when only seven did. But with the “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012” — did liberals think about that title? — 172 House Democrats voted to make the Bush income-tax rates permanent for all but 0.7 percent of taxpayers — individuals earning more than $400,000 and couples earning more than $450,000.

Liberals could have had a revenue increase of $3.7 trillion over 10 years. Instead, they surrendered nearly $3.1 trillion of that. They cannot have repeated bites at this apple. They cannot now increase government revenue as a share of gross domestic product through tax reform because Republicans insist that the Taxpayer Relief Act closed the revenue question. And because tax reform is dead for the foreseeable future, so are hopes for a revenue surge produced by vigorous economic growth.

<snip>
Sixty-seven Senate votes are needed to send a proposed amendment to the states for ratification. There are 45 Republican senators. There are nowhere near 22 Democrats who would vote for an amendment Republicans could support. Still, Republicans, whose divisions cause Democratic gloating, could use a balanced-budget amendment to divide Democrats who threw the remnants of their fiscal self-respect off the cliff.

13 replies, 1041 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 13 replies Author Time Post
Reply George F Will argues for a balanced budget Amendment... (Original post)
kentuck Jan 2013 OP
sadbear Jan 2013 #1
lastlib Jan 2013 #2
Richardo Jan 2013 #3
MissMarple Jan 2013 #9
Richardo Jan 2013 #10
MissMarple Jan 2013 #12
JVS Jan 2013 #13
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #4
KansDem Jan 2013 #5
Make7 Jan 2013 #6
Wellstone ruled Jan 2013 #7
4Q2u2 Jan 2013 #8
moondust Jan 2013 #11

Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:14 PM

1. Looks like we'll just have to cut the bloated defense budget now.

Oh well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:19 PM

2. Darn.

I wanted to be able to kill every inhabitant of the planet at least sixty times over.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:22 PM

3. Need to update the Paul Krugman quote:

"George Will is a stupid person's idea of what a smart person sounds like."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Richardo (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:01 PM

9. Too, too funny! He nailed it.

Here's to Dr. Krugman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MissMarple (Reply #9)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:12 PM

10. His original quote was referring to Newt Gingrich, which is even funnier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Richardo (Reply #10)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:20 PM

12. Can you see the two of them marooned together....without their technology?

That might make a Twilight Zone episode.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Richardo (Reply #3)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:25 PM

13. I think Vonnegut's statement about Slaughterhouse Five was the best.

"I have no regrets about this book, which the owlish nitwit George Will said trivialized the Holocaust."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:22 PM

4. Right after we get the ERA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:23 PM

5. Are we still listening to George Will?

I used to listen to his drivel back in the mid-90s when I watched "The McLaughlin Group" on PBS.

Why is it these folks never leave? We're still hearing from for likes of Newt Gingrich and Pat Robertson who had the heydays in the late 80s and early 90s.

Enough already! Let's see some new faces and hear some new ideas!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 02:33 PM

6. Wasn't Eisenhower the last Republican president to have a balanced budget?

One has to wonder why that is....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:07 PM

7. Got a whole bunch of Stupid going on here.

George Will is a multi-millionaire and he does not give a rats ass about the little people. Another prick with ears that needs his Meds reevaluated for his own good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 04:23 PM

8. Forcing

a balanced budget on any particular President Dem or rePub may result in cuts to programs that either side will not like while not in power. I am pretty sure that mR Will would love balancing the budget by raising taxes on over opinionated gas bags, and rePub political stategist like his wife, and you thought Romney was an abomination. President Rick Perry????????? Holy Hand Grenades.
That is hate speech right there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Original post)

Thu Jan 10, 2013, 05:16 PM

11. Doesn't work at the federal level.

Unlike the states, the Fed needs the flexibility to cover anything that could possibly happen in the whole country--Hell or high water. The Fed is lender and guarantor of last resort. It would be foolish to tie its fiscal hands and then potentially have to face multiple natural disasters and/or wars and/or epidemics and/or states that couldn't balance their budgets and defaulted and/or whatever.

Better to just get smarter and more responsible people in Congress holding the purse strings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread