HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Pannetta: entitlements mu...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:24 PM

Pannetta: entitlements must be on the table

Interview I heard this morning on NPR.

Fabulous.

They just won't let up.

43 replies, 2892 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 43 replies Author Time Post
Reply Pannetta: entitlements must be on the table (Original post)
MannyGoldstein Feb 2013 OP
Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #1
Jackpine Radical Feb 2013 #7
Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #14
Jackpine Radical Feb 2013 #15
Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #16
bvar22 Feb 2013 #21
Cali_Democrat Feb 2013 #2
indepat Feb 2013 #9
arthritisR_US Feb 2013 #39
still_one Feb 2013 #3
HereSince1628 Feb 2013 #4
woo me with science Feb 2013 #8
AndyA Feb 2013 #5
duffyduff Feb 2013 #11
AndyA Feb 2013 #12
smirkymonkey Feb 2013 #19
Blue_In_AK Feb 2013 #20
Autumn Feb 2013 #6
JaneyVee Feb 2013 #10
dballance Feb 2013 #28
JaneyVee Feb 2013 #41
TheCowsCameHome Feb 2013 #13
dballance Feb 2013 #17
cantbeserious Feb 2013 #24
newthinking Feb 2013 #25
ReRe Feb 2013 #31
mfcorey1 Feb 2013 #18
Gregorian Feb 2013 #22
MotherPetrie Feb 2013 #23
HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #26
think Feb 2013 #27
kenny blankenship Feb 2013 #37
think Feb 2013 #42
BlueStreak Feb 2013 #29
Curmudgeoness Feb 2013 #30
doc03 Feb 2013 #32
L0oniX Feb 2013 #33
Deep13 Feb 2013 #34
SHRED Feb 2013 #35
valerief Feb 2013 #36
Swede Atlanta Feb 2013 #38
ProfessionalLeftist Feb 2013 #40
Kablooie Feb 2013 #43

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #1)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:36 PM

7. If I lean toward Krugman,

it's from the left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #7)


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #14)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:51 PM

15. Yes, it is my opinion that I stand to the left of Krugman.

What is your opinion of where I stand?

Please elucidate my political opinions for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #15)


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #16)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:23 PM

21. Wait..... What?

You "really don't care" where he stands or sits or kneels or whatever, or what his opinions are for that matter.....

....but you jump in here twice to attack him personally with vague and unsupported insults?
I mean, WTF?

You KNOW that doesn't make ANY sense,
don't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:26 PM

2. This the same guy that was whining about defense cuts?

Yup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:37 PM

9. If he ain't a reich-winger, he is surely parrots the reich-wing meme: to wit,

reich-wingers will gladly renege on pre-paid benefits earned by social security and Medicare recipients rather than require the most affluent and large corporations to shoulder the equitable portion of the income tax burden necessary for the nation to get its house in order.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 07:41 PM

39. He can eat horse dung for all I care. Massive

cuts to his war toys and his bloated old men is what is needed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:28 PM

3. And why do I care what the sec of defense thinks again?

What helps people more, war or social security and Medicare

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:33 PM

4. I expect we'll get sequestration cuts, and then a restored military budget via multi-step increases

of "essential" spending during a time of {undeclared} war. There will be no restoration of cuts to social programs.

This will allow everyone to blame the previous congress for the cuts, and then a lot of finger-pointing at anonymous phantoms in the do-nothing Congress from all directions for failing to restore the cuts to social programs.

When Memorial Day rolls around and hamburger is selling for $4.50 a pound and gasoline is about the same per gallon, they will have crushed all possibility for anything that hints of a 'progressive' agenda.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:37 PM

8. How about the $633 BILLION-dollar military funding bill


that was passed by the Democratic Senate in December?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022060449


They operate on the assumption that we have the memories of gnats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:34 PM

5. It's not entitlements, it's EARNED BENEFITS.

People work for years and pay into these programs. If anything is going to be cut, it should be done for those who haven't worked at all yet, not for those who've already been paying in.

The sacrifices the middle class and those in need have made far outweigh those at the top. In fact, the top has done exceptionally, disproportionately well during this time. In order to truly make sacrifices "shared," the top percentage will have to put more in for a while, to catch up to those who've already been paying.

Americans are entitled to their earned benefits, and anyone who votes to cut them should be voted out of office at the very next opportunity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyA (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:39 PM

11. Distinction without a difference

Entitlements ARE earned benefits. You pay into it, you are entitled to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to duffyduff (Reply #11)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:43 PM

12. The difference is some people hear "entitlements" and that equals a hand out

It's all in the way it's presented. I think there needs to be a distinction. People should understand it's not something the government is giving out, it's something people have paid into for years so it's there when they need it.

I've heard people connect entitlements to food stamps, etc., so many don't get the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyA (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:18 PM

19. +10.000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AndyA (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:22 PM

20. It's not entitlements,

it's collecting our insurance payout for managing to survive to retirement age.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:35 PM

6. Let's put his fucking entitlements on the chopping block

fair is fair. No, they are not going to let up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:38 PM

10. Says the fucking guy who asks for $670 Million per jet fighter to fight no aerial combats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:56 PM

28. Exactly. Who on Earth (literally) Is Going to Get into an Air War with the US?

The only people who have the fighters to do it are our allies and there is no incentive for them to stop being our allies. To do so would really screw up their economies as we got together with our other allies and imposed sanctions/blockades/etc. on them.

N. Korea has an estimated 484 fighters. The US has over 2,000. Not to mention we have better support systems for our aircraft by the way of tankers for aerial refueling, AWACS and bases for landing and maintaining our fighters all over the world. It would be insane to challenge us. Of course, the sanity of N. Korean leaders is typically always in question.

On Edit: The Navy has approx. 704 fighters to add to the 2,100 or so the USAF has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #28)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 10:58 PM

41. Its all those aerial dogfights with the Taliban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:45 PM

13. Which ones, beagle eyes - The military's, or the necessary expenditures?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 04:56 PM

17. Is Pannetta Trying to Gain Favor in the MIC to Get His Lucrative Post-Gov't. Job?

Sounds like he's trying to set himself up for his next job either at a MIC-supported think tank or in some MIC corporation. He's been against sequestration and repeated the memes about it being a danger to our readiness and how it would "hollow out the military."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #17)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:38 PM

24. We Have A Winner!

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #17)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:41 PM

25. Ding Ding Ding!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #17)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 06:47 PM

31. Bingo!

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

He's singing the swinging door jubilee!

Someone remind me again about POs "swinging door rule."

It's so irrelevant that I can't remember it...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:04 PM

18. Military spending must be on the table, first!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:26 PM

22. With Democrats like this, who needs Republicans?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:27 PM

23. Fuck him

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:46 PM

26. If so, then military/war spending goddamn well should be on the chopping block. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 05:54 PM

27. Why is the former head of the military and CIA discussing entitlement reform?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to think (Reply #27)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 07:24 PM

37. Panetta was also Clinton's Chief of Staff and head of OMB

(Office of Management and Budget)

So when he speaks you are hearing Inner Party thoughts voiced out loud.

Fuck 'em.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenny blankenship (Reply #37)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 11:16 PM

42. Thank you

I thought my question was somewhat rhetorical. Apparently I lack depth AND memory. Need to google my noodle more......

Thanks again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 06:22 PM

29. You mean "entitlements" like Boeing, General Dynamics and the rest of the $trillion

a year we sink into an out-of-control "defense" industry that never actually makes Americans safer?

Yeah, it is time to take a hard look at those entitlements.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 06:45 PM

30. Now Pannetta is an expert in economics too?

Let's put the military budget-----which is a much higher percent of the total budget, on the table first.

This sounds like he is just mouthing the Republican talking points. That, and trying to protect his excesses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 06:49 PM

32. I heard him on MTP, we have to have entitlement reform

and discretionary budget cuts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 07:04 PM

33. Let's start by removing entitlements for the generals ...and congress. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 07:04 PM

34. Rest of country: forget it! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 07:17 PM

35. start with his

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 07:22 PM

36. Of course, he must mean all the tax loophole entitlements the rich get.

Anything else would be ridiculous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 07:25 PM

38. If we were in dire straights I would agree.....

 

that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security would be "on the table".

But we aren't. The reality is there is PLENTY of money to fully fund, if not expand, these programs if we have the political will.

American businesses are NOT at a disadvantage relative to other countries. While the legal tax rate may be higher than other countries, the reality is that the effective tax rate on businesses, in all forms including payroll, etc. are much lower than any other developed country.

We can, and should demand more, from businesses in terms of their contribution to the "whole". They get all the benefits of our legal system including limited liability, educated workforce, highways, waterways, railways, etc.

A small increase in the % of taxation for these entities along with enforcement of the LEGAL tax rate would pour BILLIONS into the federal treasury.

Stop corporate welfare now! Take care of PEOPLE, not IMAGINARY LEGAL ENTITIES!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Sun Feb 3, 2013, 08:38 PM

40. Says another rich asshole who will never need them anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Mon Feb 4, 2013, 12:07 PM

43. I agree.

The entitlements generously doled out to the rich must be on the table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread