Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Do you agree with the President that now is a good time for spending cuts?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 06:50 PM
Original message
Poll question: Do you agree with the President that now is a good time for spending cuts?
Do you agree that, in times of crisis, responsible use of the federal budget is akin to responsible use of a family budget?

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
1. On the military? Yes I do.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. For the purposes of the poll, let's define the cuts as those likely to be made
In other words, discretionary spending and entitlements. I don't think defense is at much risk for the foreseeable future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. In that case, no. The middle class and poor have suffered for..
too long. The deficit should be reduced through tax increases on the rich, military spending cuts, and closing tax loopholes such as GE's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
barbtries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. what bluestateguy said
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. Depends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
4. Now is the time to TAX THE 2%ERS until they know pain like
the rest of us, and get us the hell out of our foreign military entanglements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dkf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. We are going back to Clinton rates soon enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. No. You have to spend money to make money and create jobs. Cutting is pandering.
Pandering to idiots.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northoftheborder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
6. Not the ones he agreed to. Look to corp. loopholes, offshore bank accounts, .....
the top 5% and the military.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. Hell NO, The Dangers of Deficit Reduction
by Joseph Stiglitz

SNIP* The financial sector has imposed huge externalities on the rest of society. Americas financial industry polluted the world with toxic mortgages, and, in line with the well established polluter pays principle, taxes should be imposed on it. Besides, well-designed taxes on the financial sector might help alleviate problems caused by excessive leverage and banks that are too big to fail. Taxes on speculative activity might encourage banks to focus greater attention on performing their key societal role of providing credit.

Over the longer term, most economists agree that governments, especially in advanced industrial countries with aging populations, should be concerned about the sustainability of their policies. But we must be wary of deficit fetishism. Deficits to finance wars or give-aways to the financial sector (as happened on a massive scale in the US) lead to liabilities without corresponding assets, imposing a burden on future generations. But high-return public investments that more than pay for themselves can actually improve the well-being of future generations, and it would be doubly foolish to burden them with debts from unproductive spending and then cut back on productive investments.

These are questions for a later day at least in many countries, prospects of a robust recovery are, at best, a year or two away. For now, the economics is clear: reducing government spending is a risk not worth taking.

Joseph E. Stiglitz is University Professor at Columbia University and recipient of the 2001 Nobel Prize in Economics. His most recent book Freefall: Free Markets and the Sinking of the Global Economy is available in French (Le Triomphe De La Cupidit, Liens Qui Liberent) and will be available shortly in Japanese, Spanish, German, and Italian.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stiglitz123...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-09-11 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. You ask one question in your OP title
and then ask a different one in the OP

A lot of variables in either scenario

Sound economic decisions are needed, what we have in Congress and this administration is emotions and agendas.
Nobody is looking at what makes sense and serves a purpose.

If you were to look at it as a family budget and you had most of your money concentrated in one area (the upper incomes) then that is where the family would go to get the money to provide for the family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 17th 2014, 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC